Didn't read the whole thread to see if it was already posted, but here Skip Bayless and Darren Woodson debate this very topic:
#t=0m42s
There are 230 users in the forums
If we were to play Green Bay today...
Nov 7, 2011 at 11:35 AM
- KowboyKiller
- Veteran
- Posts: 6,988
Nov 7, 2011 at 11:36 AM
- verb1der
- Member
- Posts: 15,613
Originally posted by KowboyKiller:
Didn't read the whole thread to see if it was already posted, but here Skip Bayless and Darren Woodson debate this very topic:
#t=0m42s
LOL go Skip go!!....I kinda like him now!
Nov 7, 2011 at 2:15 PM
- strat1080
- Veteran
- Posts: 83
Originally posted by dj43:
I agree the 49ers could shut down their running game. I just would not overlook what Starks can do. For an example of that, just go back and look at the Super Bowl last year. He is powerful and makes good decisions. He doesn't have Grants quickness but he isn't chopped liver by any means.
It will all come down to how much the 49er passing game improves over the next 8 weeks. If everyone stays healthy, it will make for an interesting playoff run.
I think Green Bay's ground game is largely overlooked. They have a two-headed attack and both backs are averaging over 4 YPC. Billick said it yesterday during the GB/SD game that Starks would definitely be a 1,000+ yard back with more carries in a more traditional offense. People have some misconceptions about Green Bay. They don't throw the ball 40+ times a game. Rodgers hasn't even thrown 40 passes in a game this year. Rodgers is playing ultra efficient right now and Green Bay has had a commanding lead in the 4th quarter in all 8 games this year. That is why Green Bay's ground game looks average because most of the carries are happening simply to run out the clock. Green Bay's pass:run ratio is actually very traditional. Its about 60:40. I think some of you folks are making a big mistake thinking Green Bay is this one dimensional team that throws the ball 45 times every game. I think the 49ers can give Green Bay some problems but ultimately I don't think the secondary could match up with Green Bay's weapons.
I actually don't think SF built to beat them. Run-first temas have fared "horribly" against Green Bay. Rodgers doesn't care if you keep him off the field. He only needs a couple minutes per possession to score points. I think the Eagles and Saints are better equipped. I would be surprised if Green Bay scored any less than 20 points this year. And as much flack their defense gets, the only offenses that have hung up 30 points on them are the Chargers and Saints. Green Bay's defense is #1 in INTs. People get caught up too much in the YPG. Green Bay has a stingy red zone defense and no QB other than Brees has actually had a good game against them. Again, forget about the yards. Green Bay is picking off a lot of passes. Yesterday was no fluke. They've had multiple INTs in every single game this year after Week 1. Capers throws some confusing looks at QBs resulting in picks. Those turnovers that the D has generated plays a role in Green Bay's point total. The 09 Saints are a perfect example of how an explosive offense combined with a ball-hawking secondary can bring home a title. Green Bay gives up plays on defense but they are rarely under pressure to perform and stop teams. They've been protecting big leads.
Nov 7, 2011 at 2:51 PM
- Memphis9er
- Veteran
- Posts: 12,247
Originally posted by strat1080:
I think Green Bay's ground game is largely overlooked. They have a two-headed attack and both backs are averaging over 4 YPC. Billick said it yesterday during the GB/SD game that Starks would definitely be a 1,000+ yard back with more carries in a more traditional offense. People have some misconceptions about Green Bay. They don't throw the ball 40+ times a game. Rodgers hasn't even thrown 40 passes in a game this year. Rodgers is playing ultra efficient right now and Green Bay has had a commanding lead in the 4th quarter in all 8 games this year. That is why Green Bay's ground game looks average because most of the carries are happening simply to run out the clock. Green Bay's pass:run ratio is actually very traditional. Its about 60:40. I think some of you folks are making a big mistake thinking Green Bay is this one dimensional team that throws the ball 45 times every game. I think the 49ers can give Green Bay some problems but ultimately I don't think the secondary could match up with Green Bay's weapons.
I actually don't think SF built to beat them. Run-first temas have fared "horribly" against Green Bay. Rodgers doesn't care if you keep him off the field. He only needs a couple minutes per possession to score points. I think the Eagles and Saints are better equipped. I would be surprised if Green Bay scored any less than 20 points this year. And as much flack their defense gets, the only offenses that have hung up 30 points on them are the Chargers and Saints. Green Bay's defense is #1 in INTs. People get caught up too much in the YPG. Green Bay has a stingy red zone defense and no QB other than Brees has actually had a good game against them. Again, forget about the yards. Green Bay is picking off a lot of passes. Yesterday was no fluke. They've had multiple INTs in every single game this year after Week 1. Capers throws some confusing looks at QBs resulting in picks. Those turnovers that the D has generated plays a role in Green Bay's point total. The 09 Saints are a perfect example of how an explosive offense combined with a ball-hawking secondary can bring home a title. Green Bay gives up plays on defense but they are rarely under pressure to perform and stop teams. They've been protecting big leads.
How do you account for the Pack only scoring 24 and being shut out in the second half by a very bad Rams defense? Also I don't buy your argument that the Packs run game is overlooked, at least not by anyone but the Pack themselves. If the run game is so overlooked, why are they throwing the ball in the fourth quarter with leads? They should be running nonstop with the lead in the fourth quarter, that is conventional football. GB is a damn good offense but have the 30th ranked pass defense before they gave up 400 to a struggling Phillip Rivers. Let's put it this way, if they didn't get the two pick six plays from Rivers, they lose the game by a touchdown. You saying that they can count on getting interceptions for scores in any game they need them in? I don't buy it.
Nov 7, 2011 at 3:12 PM
- Esco
- Hall of Fame
- Posts: 26,027
Originally posted by MadDog49er:They would destroy us. Aaron Rodgers is living on another planet, and we could not even come close to keeping up with them offensively. The Niners are a really good team, but the Packers are clearly the best team in the NFL, and it may not be that close.
I like our chances then
Nov 7, 2011 at 3:13 PM
- HessianDud
- Veteran
- Posts: 22,995
Originally posted by Esco:
Originally posted by MadDog49er:
They would destroy us. Aaron Rodgers is living on another planet, and we could not even come close to keeping up with them offensively. The Niners are a really good team, but the Packers are clearly the best team in the NFL, and it may not be that close.
I like our chances then
lol
Nov 7, 2011 at 3:13 PM
- fastforward
- Veteran
- Posts: 1,756
Originally posted by KowboyKiller:
Didn't read the whole thread to see if it was already posted, but here Skip Bayless and Darren Woodson debate this very topic:
The debaters forgot the fact that A. Smith is capable of participating in a shoot-out on his own. He threw 3 TDs in the second halves against the Texans and the Packers in 2009 for example. His past problems have been not being able to put together a complete 4 quarters of play - in the Packers game he only turned on his engine in the second half. This season while some problems are still there, Smith has played a lot more consistent. He had a great third quarter against the Eagles. It'll be interesting to see what happens when Harbaugh opens the gate as the game situation demands.
Nov 7, 2011 at 3:35 PM
- LambdaChi49
- Veteran
- Posts: 13,308
We're not going to try to stop Aaron Rodgers...we WILL stop Aaron Rodgers.
Ok all joking aside...I think people who just say.."well if the 49ers want to beat the Packers...they better be ready for a shoot out" don't really understand how we play...or actually...how we BEAT teams. Just about every team we've played had QBs that threw for a bunch of yards against us.
I can obviously see why they're saying that but I don't think that's the ONLY way they can win. If the Niners play great defense and our front 4 apply pressure on Rodgers while allowing the rest to concentrate on pass defense...we have a legit shot at beating GB. IF the game is determined by a "shoot out" then yeah...the edge DEFINITELY goes to Green Bay. I think Alex Smith can survive in a shoot out but not win one. If Alex puts up 28 points...Aaron will put up 35 or more. That's just the way it will go if it comes down to a "shoot out." The 49ers game plan should be to NOT LET IT get to that point. If we control the ball, let our defense dictate what the Packers do (see Super Bowl NE vs NYG), then in all honesty....Alex Smith can throw for LESS than 220 yards and we can win the game. It's not about HOW many yards you have or HOW many TD passes you have...but HOW and WHEN we get those yards.
I wonder if any of these analysts watched the Eagles game. Their offense generated 500+ yards and we still won with Alex throwing for less than 300. They also neglect the fact that while Alex may not be a yardage monster throughout the game...he's clutch.
Bottom line: if we play GB and it turns into a "shoot out" then we will most likely lose. If we play GB and it turns into a smash mouth battle...then we can win.
Ok all joking aside...I think people who just say.."well if the 49ers want to beat the Packers...they better be ready for a shoot out" don't really understand how we play...or actually...how we BEAT teams. Just about every team we've played had QBs that threw for a bunch of yards against us.
I can obviously see why they're saying that but I don't think that's the ONLY way they can win. If the Niners play great defense and our front 4 apply pressure on Rodgers while allowing the rest to concentrate on pass defense...we have a legit shot at beating GB. IF the game is determined by a "shoot out" then yeah...the edge DEFINITELY goes to Green Bay. I think Alex Smith can survive in a shoot out but not win one. If Alex puts up 28 points...Aaron will put up 35 or more. That's just the way it will go if it comes down to a "shoot out." The 49ers game plan should be to NOT LET IT get to that point. If we control the ball, let our defense dictate what the Packers do (see Super Bowl NE vs NYG), then in all honesty....Alex Smith can throw for LESS than 220 yards and we can win the game. It's not about HOW many yards you have or HOW many TD passes you have...but HOW and WHEN we get those yards.
I wonder if any of these analysts watched the Eagles game. Their offense generated 500+ yards and we still won with Alex throwing for less than 300. They also neglect the fact that while Alex may not be a yardage monster throughout the game...he's clutch.
Bottom line: if we play GB and it turns into a "shoot out" then we will most likely lose. If we play GB and it turns into a smash mouth battle...then we can win.
Nov 7, 2011 at 3:39 PM
- NCommand
- Hall of Fame
- Posts: 123,319
Originally posted by fastforward:
The debaters forgot the fact that A. Smith is capable of participating in a shoot-out on his own. He threw 3 TDs in the second halves against the Texans and the Packers in 2009 for example. His past problems have been not being able to put together a complete 4 quarters of play - in the Packers game he only turned on his engine in the second half. This season while some problems are still there, Smith has played a lot more consistent. He had a great third quarter against the Eagles. It'll be interesting to see what happens when Harbaugh opens the gate as the game situation demands.
Funny how everyone is always so focused on Alex and Aaron. How many loses does Rivers, Brady and Brees have combined? Aren't these "elite" QB's? Ahhhh, but "any given Sunday" lives on b/c this is the ultimate "team game." Nobody thought we could win four games away let alone in the EST. Nobody thought we could come from behind, down 20 against Philly or blow out Tampa Bay at home. Nobody thought we'd be 7-1 or the have the best defense in the NFL with all the big names we lost. Nobody thought we drafted well or made a play in FA or make any noise to start the season b/c of the lockout and new coaching staffs. Now we have a team who's entire culture has changed, who gets better each week and basically, has been playing straight up for the most part. We have a FO down to water boy who believes we can not only win but win anywhere, anytime.
What this and any game comes down to is coaching (scheming) and execution. Period. This is pure Walshian-like. We saw a weakness in Tampa (runs off-tackle) and exploited them and confused the hell out of them on defense. NOBODY thought we could not only neutralize but destroy and Lions DL. Nobody thought we had the weapons to come back from 20-down in Philly. Or make a last minute drive to win on 4th down in Detroit or win a game with ST's, etc.
We have as much talent as anyone but they key now is that we have coaches who know how to exploit weaknesses in the opposition again and now, with confidence, the players just have to execute. So it won't come down to Alex vs. Aaron...it will come down to the game plans and the entire teams executing. Period. And therefore, we'll see, who the better teams are as we go. But the good thing for us is that we have only been out-coached one time this year and really, it was Harbaugh over-coaching himself.
[ Edited by NCommand on Nov 7, 2011 at 3:42 PM ]
Nov 7, 2011 at 3:40 PM
- unst4bl3
- Member
- Posts: 7,568
Their offense would destroy our D.
WE got destroyed by redskins screens yesterday, and our secondary while improved isn't that good still.
That being said, GB's Def isn't playing good so its a toss up.
WE got destroyed by redskins screens yesterday, and our secondary while improved isn't that good still.
That being said, GB's Def isn't playing good so its a toss up.
Nov 7, 2011 at 3:46 PM
- Marvin49
- Hall of Fame
- Posts: 16,501
Originally posted by strat1080:
Originally posted by dj43:
I agree the 49ers could shut down their running game. I just would not overlook what Starks can do. For an example of that, just go back and look at the Super Bowl last year. He is powerful and makes good decisions. He doesn't have Grants quickness but he isn't chopped liver by any means.
It will all come down to how much the 49er passing game improves over the next 8 weeks. If everyone stays healthy, it will make for an interesting playoff run.
I think Green Bay's ground game is largely overlooked. They have a two-headed attack and both backs are averaging over 4 YPC. Billick said it yesterday during the GB/SD game that Starks would definitely be a 1,000+ yard back with more carries in a more traditional offense. People have some misconceptions about Green Bay. They don't throw the ball 40+ times a game. Rodgers hasn't even thrown 40 passes in a game this year. Rodgers is playing ultra efficient right now and Green Bay has had a commanding lead in the 4th quarter in all 8 games this year. That is why Green Bay's ground game looks average because most of the carries are happening simply to run out the clock. Green Bay's pass:run ratio is actually very traditional. Its about 60:40. I think some of you folks are making a big mistake thinking Green Bay is this one dimensional team that throws the ball 45 times every game. I think the 49ers can give Green Bay some problems but ultimately I don't think the secondary could match up with Green Bay's weapons.
I actually don't think SF built to beat them. Run-first temas have fared "horribly" against Green Bay. Rodgers doesn't care if you keep him off the field. He only needs a couple minutes per possession to score points. I think the Eagles and Saints are better equipped. I would be surprised if Green Bay scored any less than 20 points this year. And as much flack their defense gets, the only offenses that have hung up 30 points on them are the Chargers and Saints. Green Bay's defense is #1 in INTs. People get caught up too much in the YPG. Green Bay has a stingy red zone defense and no QB other than Brees has actually had a good game against them. Again, forget about the yards. Green Bay is picking off a lot of passes. Yesterday was no fluke. They've had multiple INTs in every single game this year after Week 1. Capers throws some confusing looks at QBs resulting in picks. Those turnovers that the D has generated plays a role in Green Bay's point total. The 09 Saints are a perfect example of how an explosive offense combined with a ball-hawking secondary can bring home a title. Green Bay gives up plays on defense but they are rarely under pressure to perform and stop teams. They've been protecting big leads.
TOTALLY disagree.
Why are the Eagles or Saints better equipped? They do the same thing the Packers do just not as well.
The Niners IMO are better equipped because of the Run O, Run D and Pass rush.
Its not about keeping Rogers off the field (altho thats nice too). The great part about being this good running the ball is simply that the Packers aren't built to stop the run (altho Raji is pretty good). You neutralize Clay Matthews and Charles Woodson by lining up with 7 Offensive Linemen and just crush them.
On D, its about lining up with 4 (ALdon Smith, Justin Smith, Ray McDonald, Ahmed Brooks) and drop 7 to stop the pass. Those 4 can get there, he is seeing 7 in coverage, and even if you start running the ball.....the 49ers are the only team in the NFL that have both starting ILBs in the nickel D.
I'm not saying they win everytime, but they are much better outfitted to beat the Packers than some think.
Nov 7, 2011 at 3:49 PM
- HessianDud
- Veteran
- Posts: 22,995
Originally posted by LambdaChi49:
We're not going to try to stop Aaron Rodgers...we WILL stop Aaron Rodgers.
Ok all joking aside...I think people who just say.."well if the 49ers want to beat the Packers...they better be ready for a shoot out" don't really understand how we play...or actually...how we BEAT teams. Just about every team we've played had QBs that threw for a bunch of yards against us.
I can obviously see why they're saying that but I don't think that's the ONLY way they can win. If the Niners play great defense and our front 4 apply pressure on Rodgers while allowing the rest to concentrate on pass defense...we have a legit shot at beating GB. IF the game is determined by a "shoot out" then yeah...the edge DEFINITELY goes to Green Bay. I think Alex Smith can survive in a shoot out but not win one. If Alex puts up 28 points...Aaron will put up 35 or more. That's just the way it will go if it comes down to a "shoot out." The 49ers game plan should be to NOT LET IT get to that point. If we control the ball, let our defense dictate what the Packers do (see Super Bowl NE vs NYG), then in all honesty....Alex Smith can throw for LESS than 220 yards and we can win the game. It's not about HOW many yards you have or HOW many TD passes you have...but HOW and WHEN we get those yards.
I wonder if any of these analysts watched the Eagles game. Their offense generated 500+ yards and we still won with Alex throwing for less than 300. They also neglect the fact that while Alex may not be a yardage monster throughout the game...he's clutch.
Bottom line: if we play GB and it turns into a "shoot out" then we will most likely lose. If we play GB and it turns into a smash mouth battle...then we can win.
well said. I hope we get a chance to find out. It would be so epic.
Not just the Rodgers/Smith storyline, not just the #1 offense vs. the #1 defense, but Harbaugh vs. McCarthy would be the ultimate coaching battle. It would just be an incredible game.
Nov 7, 2011 at 3:59 PM
- Jcool
- Veteran
- Posts: 43,462
Just remember the NFC Championship game last year: Green Bay Packers: 21 Chicago Bears: 14. And in that game the Bears relied mostly on their 3rd string QB and still almost had a chance to send the game to OT. Granted the GB offense looks better this year so far, but I don't think they are unstoppable and the defense looks worse so if we can hold them under 24 points we have a great chance to win.
Nov 7, 2011 at 4:14 PM
- jesserdumas2
- Veteran
- Posts: 336
As a fan, I'd have to say that Green Bay's offense would give the 49ers secondary nightmares. Although the defense is very good, they haven't seen a passing game anywhere near what Green Bay has put together so far this year. The only reasonable comparison I can make is to the Dallas Cowboys and we all saw how that went. Even against the likes of John Beck they gave up over 250 in yardage. I know a lot of that was playing some prevent but still, we all know the level of talent in that secondary, they don't suck, but you need a lot more talent and continuity than that to stop a QB on the level of Rogers right now. The Packers know, no matter how well the other team is moving the ball, they can just turn the game into a track meet and usually win.
Now, if they put his @ss on the ground a few times, maybe trade a 15 yarder for giving Rogers a "headache" and put the fear of God in him, then you've got yourself a different ball game. One I don't think the Niners would win, but positively dominate.
Without Aaron Rogers, the Green Bay packers are the Indianapolis Colts right now. That defense of theirs is not scaring anybody and I think with a good gameplan, Harbaugh and Roman could scheme up a winning gameplan even with Rogers playing. But this isn't rocket science, you knock any quarterback on his behind enough times, their play will be affected. I've not seen a 49ers defense that was so adept at rushing the passer since the early nineties and even then, I don't think they did it as well as this. Could they get to Rogers who is very escapable and has that quick-release? Tough to say, he's a helluva player and nobody's done it yet.
One thing I will say though, which I haven't heard anywhere else about this hypothetical matchup, is that if these two teams do end up playing in January and that game happens to be played in Green Bay, the weather will likely favor, heavily, the road team and their style of play. You always want home-field advantage for obvious reasons, but I don't think playing on the "Frozen Tundra" of Lambeau is nearly the disadvantage it used to be for the 49ers as it was back in the Steve Young days.
Now, if they put his @ss on the ground a few times, maybe trade a 15 yarder for giving Rogers a "headache" and put the fear of God in him, then you've got yourself a different ball game. One I don't think the Niners would win, but positively dominate.
Without Aaron Rogers, the Green Bay packers are the Indianapolis Colts right now. That defense of theirs is not scaring anybody and I think with a good gameplan, Harbaugh and Roman could scheme up a winning gameplan even with Rogers playing. But this isn't rocket science, you knock any quarterback on his behind enough times, their play will be affected. I've not seen a 49ers defense that was so adept at rushing the passer since the early nineties and even then, I don't think they did it as well as this. Could they get to Rogers who is very escapable and has that quick-release? Tough to say, he's a helluva player and nobody's done it yet.
One thing I will say though, which I haven't heard anywhere else about this hypothetical matchup, is that if these two teams do end up playing in January and that game happens to be played in Green Bay, the weather will likely favor, heavily, the road team and their style of play. You always want home-field advantage for obvious reasons, but I don't think playing on the "Frozen Tundra" of Lambeau is nearly the disadvantage it used to be for the 49ers as it was back in the Steve Young days.
Nov 7, 2011 at 4:33 PM
- tjd808185
- Veteran
- Posts: 26,004
Originally posted by LambdaChi49:
We're not going to try to stop Aaron Rodgers...we WILL stop Aaron Rodgers.
Ok all joking aside...I think people who just say.."well if the 49ers want to beat the Packers...they better be ready for a shoot out" don't really understand how we play...or actually...how we BEAT teams. Just about every team we've played had QBs that threw for a bunch of yards against us.
I can obviously see why they're saying that but I don't think that's the ONLY way they can win. If the Niners play great defense and our front 4 apply pressure on Rodgers while allowing the rest to concentrate on pass defense...we have a legit shot at beating GB. IF the game is determined by a "shoot out" then yeah...the edge DEFINITELY goes to Green Bay. I think Alex Smith can survive in a shoot out but not win one. If Alex puts up 28 points...Aaron will put up 35 or more. That's just the way it will go if it comes down to a "shoot out." The 49ers game plan should be to NOT LET IT get to that point. If we control the ball, let our defense dictate what the Packers do (see Super Bowl NE vs NYG), then in all honesty....Alex Smith can throw for LESS than 220 yards and we can win the game. It's not about HOW many yards you have or HOW many TD passes you have...but HOW and WHEN we get those yards.
I wonder if any of these analysts watched the Eagles game. Their offense generated 500+ yards and we still won with Alex throwing for less than 300. They also neglect the fact that while Alex may not be a yardage monster throughout the game...he's clutch.
Bottom line: if we play GB and it turns into a "shoot out" then we will most likely lose. If we play GB and it turns into a smash mouth battle...then we can win.
Philly also fumbled the ball on the 1 yard line and missed 2 field goals. We had mistakes in that game too, I'm just pointing out that they easily could have lit up the scoreboard had they not made so many unforced errors. Those are errors Green Bay very rarely makes. If we play like we played against Philly we will lose, but I don't see that happening.
More likely than not the game is going to be Green Bay and weather will have an impact. Things are going to slow down for Green Bay. If the game is 5 degrees light snow mix you have to think our run game and defense goes that much furthur. Like others have pointed it's tough putting up big points in January.