Third-down defense

[fiestavike]

The Packers will not be bringing an A-List OLINE to the game on Thursday. Hopefully that will help.

IMO though, sacking Rogers isn't going to beat GB. The play of the Secondary is what will be tested on Thursday. It can't be worse than last year where McCArthy had such low respect for our secondary that he went for it on 4th down reporeatedly. (And it paid off...)

Yes, if teams can convert more than 50% of the time it is wise to go for it on 4th down. Every 4th down conversion is the equivalent of a turnover so until we prove we can stop it, a strong case could be made for going for it on 4th down against us every time.

[PurpleKoolaid]

The secondary is playing better, in large part, because they can rely on Harrison. Blanton also seems to be at least average as a safety. That means the CB's know they are going to be having help. Also Rhodes is really coming into his own. Much more speed then I thought he had. Turning his head and going for the ball. Robinson also is showing signs of improvement.

I didn't think giving Griffen that huge of a contract, before we even knew if he could be a starting DE, was a good idea. I was watching Robison pretty close and when he wasn't getting held, he looked lackluster. We do not get pressure with just the front four. And QBs like Rogers will kill us if we have to blitz every down. I like it when Floyd and Joseph are both on the field at the same time.

Dead Poet is right, the secondary has been getting the job done. I also like what I saw from Hodges. Jasper is, well, Jasper.

Captain is a huge disappointment. I wouldn't be surprised if they played Sherels a little more.

[dead_poet]

@seankjensen -- Mike Zimmer: "We need to rush (the passer) as a team, not as individuals." #Vikings

[fiestavike]

exactly!

[Purple Reign]

The Packers will not be bringing an A-List OLINE to the game on Thursday. Hopefully that will help.

Atlanta sure didn't have an A-list o-line, more like a D-list, so I'm not sure how much that will help.

[frosted]

Atlanta sure didn't have an A-list o-line, more like a D-list, so I'm not sure how much that will help.

The Packers (10) have allowed twice as many sacks as Atlanta (5) has.

[Purple Reign]

"Captain Munnerlyn called out the problem last week and the Atlanta Falcons still converted 10-of-15 third-down attempts."

I find that comment a bit amusing. Just because he called out the problem means it should magically be fixed?

[frosted]

"Captain Munnerlyn called out the problem last week and the Atlanta Falcons still converted 10-of-15 third-down attempts."

I find that comment a bit amusing. Just because he called out the problem means it should magically be fixed?

I think the point was, despite the team's acknowledgment that 3rd down defense is something they need to work on (indicating they likely worked on it in practice last week), they did not improve at all from week 3 to week 4. Not very amusing, I'd say that is quite concerning. I missed the part where he said the problem should have magically been fixed by his acknowledgment of said problem - was that in the article?

[Purple Reign]

The Packers (10) have allowed twice as many sacks as Atlanta (5) has.

You could also say that Packers have played against better defenses than Atlanta so it is pretty hard to compare apples to apples. But when Atlanta is down to playing their backups and a tight end for a tackle, I don't see Green Bay's line being worse.

[Purple Reign]

I think the point was, despite the team's acknowledgment that 3rd down defense is something they need to work on (indicating they likely worked on it in practice last week), they did not improve at all from week 3 to week 4. Not very amusing, I'd say that is quite concerning. I missed the part where he said the problem should have magically been fixed by his acknowledgment of said problem - was that in the article?

I didn't say them not fixing the problem was amusing. It is just how it is stated, it makes it sound like just because Munnerlyn called out the problem and they STILL converted 10-15 third-down attempts then the problem should have been corrected. I realize what the point was, it's just the way it was stated that made it amusing to me. Maybe it's my background as a computer programmer that I take things too literally sometimes. Sorry if I offended you, just poking a little fun at that statement.

[frosted]

I didn't say them not fixing the problem was amusing. It is just how it is stated, it makes it sound like just because Munnerlyn called out the problem and they STILL converted 10-15 third-down attempts then the problem should have been corrected. I realize what the point was, it's just the way it was stated that made it amusing to me. Maybe it's my background as a computer programmer that I take things too literally sometimes. Sorry if I offended you, just poking a little fun at that statement.

You didn't offend me, sorry if I offended you by pointing out the meaning of the sentence.

[frosted]

You could also say that Packers have played against better defenses than Atlanta so it is pretty hard to compare apples to apples. But when Atlanta is down to playing their backups and a tight end for a tackle, I don't see Green Bay's line being worse.

You're right, you could say that. You could also say the Falcons offensive line has performed better than the Packers offensive line.

[The Breeze]

Ryan really burned them on the blitz. Methinks there is a connection between the way the line is not working as a unit on the pass rush and the lack of a full grasp of the system in the backfield that makes it a dicey scenario to blitz on downs where a blitz seems obvious. Good qbs can really torch defenses on blitzes right?
Rodgers is a fine example.

The Vikes had some pretty big coverage gaffs against the Flacons that resulted in big plays.

I just think it will take a some time (2-3 weeks) before we really see this defense synched up. Too bad they have Rodgers on a short week...his mobility is going to be a cause for disciplined pass rush and possibly a great learning experience the d-line. The rough early schedule is turning out to be a blessing.

[Purple Reign]

I think the point was, despite the team's acknowledgment that 3rd down defense is something they need to work on (indicating they likely worked on it in practice last week), they did not improve at all from week 3 to week 4. Not very amusing, I'd say that is quite concerning. I missed the part where he said the problem should have magically been fixed by his acknowledgment of said problem - was that in the article?

Just to clarify myself a little bit more, I see that comment being pretty much similar to saying something like "We've determined that the problem with us losing is that the other team scores more points than we do, but the next week the other team still scores more points than we did" which to me is a bit ridiculous. Obviously knowing what the problem is and being able to do something to correct it are 2 different things. While identifying giving up 3rd down conversions is a problem, it's over simplistic to think it would be easy to fix since I'm sure there are many different defensive coverages that are used depending on the yardage and not a problem with just a single 3rd down defensive strategy.

[frosted]

Just to clarify myself a little bit more, I see that comment being pretty much similar to saying something like "We've determined that the problem with us losing is that the other team scores more points than we do, but the next week the other team still scores more points than we did" which to me is a bit ridiculous. Obviously knowing what the problem is and being able to do something to correct it are 2 different things. While identifying giving up 3rd down conversions is a problem, it's over simplistic to think it would be easy to fix since I'm sure there are many different defensive coverages that are used depending on the yardage and not a problem with just a single 3rd down defensive strategy.

I can tell you've been thinking a lot about this. But, I don't think those two things are as similar as you think. Let's look at it logically - winning and losing is an end result - an outcome. Third down defense is but a small part of the overall end result, a means to an end, if you will. Even then, it is somewhat broad, considering the complexities of football, but certainly more narrow than simply looking at the score. You have to look at the various reasons for the final outcome, in order to improve that outcome. As it were, on drives that ended in a poor outcome, defensively, the last two weeks, third down conversions played a large part in those poor outcomes. You can narrow the scope even further, by looking at all those third down plays, and attempting to find a common thread (or common threadS), that may have been contributing to the more broad outcome of failure on third down, and that in turn, will hopefully work its way allllll the way up the ladder to the end result of the game. Clearly, the coaching staff is going to go deeper than just saying "we need to score more points than the other team"! As you alluded to, it's much more complex than one single 'third down strategy'.

I don't think anyone implied it would be easy to fix that one specific problem (that being, third down defense). However, I think it's reasonable (week to week) to continue to look at that small piece of winning/losing, and determine what improvements have been been made in those situations, and whether it affected the overall goal of playing better on third down. Rome wasn't built in a day, so I doubt they will "fix" it this week, or probably next week, or the week after. That said, I don't believe it's unreasonable to ask for some improvement, considering it's a problem that has clearly been identified, and presumably being worked on.

The article was written in such a way, that it points out, that the above steps should be in the works, considering one of the Vikings defensive players alluded to third down defense as a problem, last week. Essentially what I take from it, is despite that process, the third down defense has not yet improved (fixed?, that may be a bite over zealous) after one week. Clearly, it is something that will be monitored, week-to-week. As with in any industry, one would hope incremental improvement will be made in the time after a problem has been identified.