I can't believe that our defense is now ranked 3rd in the NFL. That's pretty impressive. The biggest difference is that that this team can stop the run. If I'm not mistaken we have only given up two 100 yard rushing games but both of those were to Top 3 RBs. Benson actually leads the NFL in rushing now and just thrashed his old team who supposedly had a very stout run defense. Some skeptics could argue that our defensive rankings improved dramatically after playing two bad teams but guess what. The Vikings have also played the Lions and Browns. They didn't beat them as convincingly as the Packers did. The Lions and Browns had significantly more offensive production against the Vikings than against the Packers. I think this defense is for real. It was struggling for a while due to TT's ineptitude in getting rid of two experienced safety's at the beginning of the year that was magnified by Bigby's injury. When you don't have two solid safety's your defense is going to have some holes.

The Browns also had more offensive production at Pittsburgh than they did in Cleveland against the Packers. They had the flu when they played Pittsburgh as well so that isn't an excuse. This team is 3rd in total defense and 4th in points allowed. I knew there would be some bumps in the road initially but it looks like this defense is starting to get it together. Its a totally different defense with Bigby back. McCarthy said that he even saw the difference in practice. Bigby isn't Troy Polamalu but there is a huge difference between having an experienced starter at safety vs playing a guy that has never started a game at safety. I like Martin but he was in over his head. Its not his fault though. He wasn't even on the team until the first week of the season. Getting rid of Smith and Rouse at nearly the same time was a huge mistake by the front office. You can't just jettison safety's with starting experience and expect inexperienced players to play at a high level at such an important position in the 3-4 defense. It just doesn't work.

While I would like to say the 3-4 is working right now the Packers have played some really bad teams. If come the end of the year and the Packers are still a top 10 then I will be very impressed. They have done good don't get me wrong but they have played 3 teams with no real offense and 1 (bears) with a barely average offense.

Still, I'm glad that they're still relatively healthy and playing well withing the transition of the defensive scheme. Kampman is finally being used as a pass rusher and it's helping. Clay Matthews is stepping up his game. Charles Woodson is a beast and possibly the team's best player. Jenkins, Jolly and Pickett all seem to have adjusted to the transition very, very well. The best part is that it seems like each week there's another guy who comes up with the big plays that are needed to win. As they get more comfortable working together and communicating they should continue to improve. They haven't played many good teams so far, so I expect the rankings to change when they do. . . but I don't think that anyone could say that this year's defense is the liability that it was last year. Not by a long-shot. Pretty much the same players, but there's better coaching and hopefully a better scheme. All I want is improvement week in and week out. If they can do that, they'll be a top defensive unit by the time the playoff push comes around.

True, GBP. The test will come when they play some better teams.

This is what I don't get though. They have played mostly the same teams that the Vikings have played. The Vikings also had the benefit of playing the Lions, Browns, and Rams. Every NFL team is going to play bad teams. They didn't make the Lions' or Browns' offenses look better than they are and that is the key. The Browns threw for more than 200 yards against the Vikings. The Browns got 200 yards agains the Broncos. The bottom line is that the Browns had more offensive production against the Broncos, Steelers, and Vikings than they did against the Packers. That's gotta count for something.

For what it's worth, the last time the Packers held the opposition to so few points in back to back games? 1966.

Fair points and I agree, it does count for something. At the very, very least it has enabled our offense to take a couple of fourth quarters off.

In the Browns' defense (what's that you say? The Browns have a defense?) they did still have Braylon Edwards for the Denver and Minnesota games. Say what you like about Edwards, but he is clearly a notch above the rookies and scrubs they started against the Pack. It is not an accident that Anderson has completed passes at a lower rate even than JaMarcus Russell since the Edwards trade.

Actually the reason why the Browns traded Edwards is because they liked what they saw from Massaquoi who had 148 yards against a very good Bengals secondary and 83 yards against the Steelers last week. By the way Massaquoi actually has more yards than Edwards right now. Massaquoi isn't a scrub. He was a 2nd round pick and a highly touted WR coming out of college.

I definitely don't expect the Packers to be ranked in the Top 5 by the end of the season but the point of this thread is that this defense is certainly better than last year. This team actually has a respectable run defense. The Packers defense is ranked in the Top 5 in yards allowed per play. Maybe one of the most telling defensive stats of all.

Yes, we have played 3 rather poor teams to date but..... In the past the Packer Def seemed to always find a way to make every game close. I cant tell you how many times it would seem as though some rookie starter or fill in 2nd stringer would shred our def because we would always play a soft nickel and allow them to sit back and look over the field.
QB pressure is a huge difference maker. And it appears with our backside healthy we are turning up the heat a bit.

I think its actually the playcalling itself that is the cause of the D being top 5. As it as been said, the D would sit back with a decent lead and let games come close that had no business being so close.

To sum the defense up:

The Defense is finally playing to WIN at the end of the game, instead of playing to not lose.

We played St.Louis, Detroit and the Browns this season. That's why the D looks great. Can they keep it up this weekend against a great offense?

Why do people assume TT 'got rid of 2 experienced Safeties'? Not picking on Strat specifically, but I'm sure I've seen 10 of you post this by now.

I somehow doubt this is the truth of the matter. In fact it seems rather obvious that it is not.

c'mon.



Good point on the Vickies having played many of the same teams. Peterson got stymied by GB. And we ripped the ball right out of his widdle hands and scored. That had to hurt. >)

I think Dom's D is still a work in progress, but already you can see some of the adjustments that have been made and it is looking better and better.

We will know how good our defense really is this week. Last time out against the Vikings we couldn't get off the field on third down to save our lives.

Hopefully this is the case were playing bad teams really can improve your team.

Almost everything works they way they supposed to, and the players learn more in real game situations plus the coaching staff can make adjustments that actually work and build confidence in the players.

So did Minnesota and they are ranked #20 right now.

I'm lost. We aren't assuming TT got rid of experienced safeties. He did. That's a fact. Anthony Smith had about 20 games of starting experience on an elite 3-4 defense. Aaron Rouse had starting experience with us. We cut both of them over a 2 week span trusting our DB to a guy that has never started a single game at safety in his career. I could live with the Smith thing but cutting Rouse was completely idiotic. We knew Bigby was injured and that all we had left behind him was Derrick Martin if we cut Rouse. They went ahead and did it anyway. It was scrutizined by media pundits everywhere. It made absolutely no sense. Its pretty rare to cut a guy just a few days after starting a game. It raises some serious red flags.

This if very funny to me. People complain about Thompson not getting "experienced" O-linemen and using a bunch of "young" guys, yet these "young" o-linemen have more experience then these "experienced" safeties that were cut.

Guess what? We get to play the Lions again!!! If we don't blank them our D must have gotten worse... pffft.

You know what was cool? I could actually see our defense pin their ears back on a couple third and longs... that was nice.

Big test this week. I'm interested in seeing more 3-3-5 with AK in a 4 point stance lined up over the RT with Jenks lined up over the other OT. Its worked very well the last two weeks for both of those guys.

Anthony Smith?

He's done nothing on the worst team in the NFL.

That has nothing to do with the topic at hand. So you think its a good idea to cut a safety that has been on your team 3 years and knows the defense only to start a guy who has been on your team a couple of weeks and has never started a single game in his entire career at safety? That was a mind-boggling decision and it was highly scrutinized in sports media circles. Its almost without precedent to cut a player a couple of days after starting a game for your team. That just doesn't happen. Its no wonder Favre carved up this defense like a Thanksgiving turkey. That was a ridiculous mistake made by the front office. At one point Martin was benched for poor performance. It wasn't his fault though. You just can't expect a guy who has never played the position to start only a couple of weeks after joining the team. Just about every sports pundit was criticizing the Packers front office for cutting Rouse even though they knew there was nobody else behind Bigby. You can't just plug guys in to play safety in the 3-4. Its not that they cut Rouse its that the timing was absolutely terrible. They knew very well that Bigby was going to be out a few weeks. Its inexplicable. It would have been a horror show had Nick Collins also been injured at the time.

And Rouse was cut for poor performance.

Back to the topic;

This group has the potential, barring injury, to be significantly better by the the latter part of the year.

I look for Kampman, Hawk, Mathews , Barnett, Bigby and Raji to continue to improve in their roles under Capers.

Kudos to Woodson , Jolly and Jenkins for the way they have played thus far!

Yet in Bigby's and Rouse's absence, Martin was so great that Capers had to completely redesign the defense to use 5 LBs and only one safety. You aren't going to convince anybody that getting rid of Rouse even though Bigby was injured was a smart smove. Brett Favre mopped the floor with our defense because we had a completely green safety playing opposite Collins. Rouse wasn't great but he wasn't getting burned over and over again. All of a sudden Bigby is back and our defense completely turns around. It shows what a huge gap there is between our starting and backup safeties. Its ASTRONOMICAL!!! That is the fault of the front office.

I guess Charles Woodson has no clue what he is talking about though. Immediately after getting their teeth kicked in by the Vikings offense, he questioned the move to cut both Smith and Rouse. Capers had to completely redesign and scale back the aggressive nature of the defense because the backfield was always so vulnerable to the big play. Its just sheer insanity to rely on a guy that has no starting experience at safety that has only been on your team for a few weeks to start. Its one thing if Bigby was healthy and they cut Rouse but to cut him knowing full well that you would be forced to start Derrick Martin is mind-boggling.

What I find funny is the fact that you praise the Packers for having a top ranked defense, and in the same paragraph call TT inept - the man who is responsible for assemblying most of the players (actually he resigned all the Sherman carryovers so I guess you cold say he is responsible for assembling all of the players).

Well, I'm convinced it was a smart move. And by the way, Rouse WAS cut because he was burned over and over again. (The few times he was actually in the right position that is.)

But thats what is really good about this schedule is the fact that they can get their 3-4 legs under them while they learn systems against some weaker sisters. This defense is getting better each time out. Are they perfect? nope. But I think even Dom will say they are further ahead at this time than he anticipated. Also, Keep in mind the 6-1 Vikings have also played those teams, and had less success on D. Give the D credit, its coming together each game.

I really just want them to make a statement this weekend. Play fast, and aggressive.

Wasn't Rouse injured in that game he started? So what does arguing about this prove? He wouldn't have been available anyway.

One point: Big okie is not a new defense that Capers had to 'completely redesign'. It was a package designed in the offseason to ensure we made use of Chillar.

How well is everyone else doing on the worst team in the NFL? Setting records?