It would be easy to look at the final score and conclude that the bye week allowed the Packers to work out their problems.
But they still have problems. Especially on the offensive line.
"Baby Swiss" is giving up an average of five sacks per game -- and they stayed on pace with five more on Sunday against the Lions.
It didn't keep quarterback Aaron Rodgers from racking up 358 yards, and it didn't keep receiver Donald Driver from breaking the franchise reception record, going over 100 yards, and making another highlight-reel catch.
And the new 3-4 defense continues to show flashes of brilliance, holding the Lions under 149 yards to go along with the scoreboard goose egg.
For the Lions, they've still not won a game at Green Bay since 1991. And after looking competitive in two losses to the Bears and the Steelers, Detroit looked once again like a very bad team.
They now get a week off, and then perhaps their best chance to finish 2-14 or better with a visit from the Rams.
Week Six Morning Aftermath: Packers 26, Lions 0
Posted by Mike Florio on October 19, 2009 1:36 PM ET
Permalink
43 Comments
Latest stories in: Detroit Lions, Green Bay Packers, Latest News and Rumors, Top Stories
You forgot (at least) one. They didn't score nearly enough points. Too many drives petered out and they settled for field goals. If they had been able to finish drives the score would've been 34-0. So there's plenty to look at in film sessions this week. Luckily, you can get away with a few problems while playing the Lions. And hopefully the Browns.
If the Packers had scored more points against the Lions, they would have been classless. Just ask people attacking the Patriots.
Does beating the Lions really count as a win ? Lets see how many points the Packers score with their 3rd string QB at the helm. The Lions are pathetic but Green Bay is barely a step ahead of them.
"And the new 3-4 defense continues to show flashes of brilliance, holding the Lions under 149 yards to go along with the scoreboard goose egg."
Congrats GB on holding Detroit to under 149 yards, even though they didn't have their starting QB, or they best (some would say only) WR. and giving up 5 sacks to about the worst defense in the league...... great work guys. I'm sure the switch to 3-4 means instant SB champs doesn't it (well, that and wasting the talent of your best past rusher)
FAN_OF_FOUR
What does that make the Vikings then since they only won 27-13? They must be just a spec ahead of the Lions then based on your brilliant take.
Fan_Of_ Four says:
October 19, 2009 2:03 PM
Does beating the Lions really count as a win ?
I just looked on nfl.com, and sure enough it counted as a win.
When Chad Clifton re-injurred his ankle, rather than shift the entire line down one from the center, McCarthy put rookie TJ Lang in at left tackle. The line immediately began to open holes for the running game. The Packers have a lot of work to do on the O-line. Maybe Lang is a good first step.
Next week, he'll get a chance to show what he can do against the Browns.
After his two week tutorial, if he is still there, it's the Vikings rematch in Green Bay.
Lang looked real good Sunday.
Way to dicuss the fact the the Lions were playing OFFENSIVE LINEMAN on the defensive line because they had so many injuries. They were missing their starting QB, WR, CB, DE, DT other DE, SS and nickel back. Then they had backups get hurt and had to play offensive guys and defense and a thrid string QB. The Lions still got 5 sacks and shut down the Packers' run game.
Couple of points of interest:
1. Lions missing 2 best offensive players (yes stafford means more than kevin smith right now).
2. Culpepper and stanton suck
3. Missing 3 of 4 starting D line
4. Secondary sucks no matter what
The first three kept this game from being competitive and the last is just sad. I'd bet defensive game planning for the lions without calvin and stafford prior to the game was very simple.
P.S. Your login function is the biggest piece of crap I've ever seen, aside from your writing.
"Fan_Of_ Favre says:
October 19, 2009 2:03 PM
Does beating the Lions really count as a win ? Lets see how many points the Packers score with their 3rd string QB at the helm. The Lions are pathetic but Green Bay is barely a step ahead of them. "
Hey, quit wasting time here and get back to washing my jocks and socks, F-of_F!
Fan_Of_ Four says:
Does beating the Lions really count as a win ?
***************************
It counts as more of a win than if you are losing to the Lions at the half (Vikes).
The Packers are in playoff position with a shutout in a divisional game.
The Packers now have a 3-1 conference record and are 2nd in NFC net conference points.
Their .487 Strength of Schedule is 2nd highest among NFC teams in playoff position.
So look for continued good things from the Packers as they rip through the easy part of their schedule (Browns, vikings, Bucanneers, Cowboys, and 49'ers) leading up to their game on Thanksgiving.
We had two weeks to prepare for the Lions!!!! TWO WEEKS! And we have 13 penalties and no TDs in the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th quarters. Against a team with no DEF rotation. They were playing O-lineman on the Def line!!!!
We play like that against 27 other teams in this league and we lose today. We looked like hell.
This game was a step back. It was one of the sloppiest games I have seen in recent memory. But a typical performance under MM.
DEF looked good, but come on. The Lions sucked BEFORE they were decimated with injuries.
MM is done. He has no idea how to get this team up and ready to play at a high level.
Is anyone actually surprised GB won? Stafford and Calvin out and 3 outta 4 of the Dlineman were out as well (which really shows how bad GB Oline really is giving up 5 sacks to 2nd and 3rd string players). I think if the Lions were healthy they would have been competitve. But Fumblepepper hasnt been a legit QB in 5 years.
I totally agree that it was not a good game for the Packers. If not for the injuries to the Lions, they could have easily beaten the Packers. Jennings and Driver each had a great one handed catch. Thats about the highlight of the game. They better stop putting Woodson and Williams as kick returners. The coaches will look like fools if they get injured playing special teams.
Baby swiss? Clever... Yet no reference to Rodgers holding onto the ball to long or failure to adjust blocking schemes along the offensive line and with his FBs. That alone accounted for 3 of the 5 sacks in Sundays game. Do some research Florio
I think Fan of Four is mocking you douche bags for your comments last week about the Vikes. You all did not want to credit the Vikes with wins over the likes of the lions and the Browns, now "we crushed the Lions" and I hope it carries over to the Browns.
SlipperyPete says:
October 19, 2009 2:23 PM
Fan_Of_ Four says:
Does beating the Lions really count as a win ?
***************************
It counts as more of a win than if you are losing to the Lions at the half (Vikes).
Really.........................Hmmmmmmmmm. If your brain was dynamite, you couldn't blow your nose.
@Florios biatch--
I'm right there with you. 2 weeks prep time (one of which MM decided to let the team have off, and then Tuesday of the next week--I guess it's a reward for that stellar performance they put against the Vikes) to get ready for DETROIT and have 13 penalties and 5 sacks. Utterly ridiculous. I will say though that if MM goes TT needs to go right with him
As Adam-Chris says there will be lots to look at from the tapes. Hopefully they'll actually do something about it. The upcoming Browns game will be no cake walk by any means.
This was a sub par performance especially considering Lions were missing like half of their team. At least MM substituted Lang for CLifton rather than shifting the whole line.
IF we get Aaron some chances where he can stay standing we may win a few more games. Lotta work to do on the running game--actually there's still a lotta work to do period.
@ Bob Nelson,
playoffs? PLAYOFFS? Are you kidding me?
I've never seen a dumber looking coach than Mike McCarthy? Does anyone know if he's from Wisconsin? He fits right in. Anyone that feels good about a victory at home over the Lions backups needs to lay off the EBT purchased cheap whiskey. Pathetic. 6-0
Fan_Of_ Four says:
October 19, 2009 2:03 PM
Does beating the Lions really count as a win ? Lets see how many points the Packers score with their 3rd string QB at the helm. The Lions are pathetic but Green Bay is barely a step ahead of them.
----------------------------
So you're conceding that the Vikings are only 5-0?
I'm not bragging about the Packers beating the Lions, but at least they weren't trailing at the half like Washington and the Vikings were.
DocBG says:
October 19, 2009 2:10 PM
Congrats GB on holding Detroit to under 149 yards, even though they didn't have their starting QB, or they best (some would say only) WR. and giving up 5 sacks to about the worst defense in the league...... great work guys.
---------------------------
Well, that "worst defense in the league" held the Vikings to only 265 total yards, ironically the same number of yards they gained on the Vikings. Which one is the worst defense in the league again? The one that allowed 265 or the other one that allowed 265?
Bob Nelson is correct. They would be in the playoffs if the season ended today. But it doesn't of course so that doesn't mean shit. Like most of what is written by you people.
# ErinRodgers says: October 19, 2009 3:14 PM
I've never seen a dumber looking coach than Mike McCarthy?
----------------------------
Apparently you've never watched a Viking game before with Major Dad roaming the sidelines? Talk about clueless looking! I sure hope the Vikings sign him to an long term extension. I'm thankful he never got on that plane to Green Bay from Minnesota for an interview.
Adam-Chris Scheftersen says:
October 19, 2009 3:34 PM
DocBG says:
October 19, 2009 2:10 PM
Congrats GB on holding Detroit to under 149 yards, even though they didn't have their starting QB, or they best (some would say only) WR. and giving up 5 sacks to about the worst defense in the league...... great work guys.
---------------------------
Well, that "worst defense in the league" held the Vikings to only 265 total yards, ironically the same number of yards they gained on the Vikings. Which one is the worst defense in the league again? The one that allowed 265 or the other one that allowed 265?
I'm guessing he meant the team that is 1-5, and not the one that is 6-0.
@ the jackass calling himself Adam-Chris Scheftersen
Hey moron, when they played the vikes they actually had their uninjured starters playing, not people that usually play offense playing on their defensive line.... and i don't recall the vikes giving up 5 sacks, even to their starters. Plus the lions had Stafford and CJ in the game against the vikes, CJ is one of the best WR's in the league.... but yeah, your comparison makes a ton of sense doesnt it?
Another moronic packer fan who has absolutely NO SENSE of football, of that fact that injuries can play a HUGE role... but good point anyway you tool
@ Bob nelson
You mission is succeeding, keep up the good work, I agree with you SKOL VIKINGS! 6-0 punks
Vice fans told us not to make excuses because we lost to them without our starting LT and SS and lost our second LT and kick returner during the game. But then our win against the Lions doesn't really count because Detroit was missing a bunch of people. That's the type of logic you never quite get used to from the land of 3 million loons. Seems to me all you can do is win the game. Packers did that. Still a lot of warts, yes, but isn't it nice to whine about them after a win? Packers D is much better with Bigby back and Matthews starting. Lang will not make the Pro Bowl but he plays with intensity and seemed to spark the line. I expected them to be 4-1 at this point; they are one game below that but still have a shot at a very good year, especially if Favre does his late season fade again.
Ftfxr says:
October 19, 2009 3:43 PM
I'm guessing he meant the team that is 1-5, and not the one that is 6-0.
---------------------------
Ahh, but you had to guess. That speaks volumes about how the Vikings' defensive performance has declined.
That's the best you can do ...the Vikes were down at half time in week one against the Lions ? Roflmfao
Green Bay will be lucky to hit 8-8 but I guess it's an improvement from 6-10. Can anyone tell me who the QB was the last time the Packers had a winning season ? Oh thats right, its the guy in Minnesota thats 6 -0. Good thing he got on the train when it left the station. I wonder what McCarthy's mindset is these days, we all know how important that is.
adampissandmoanerson is just fixated on yards because he mows them for a living.
See, I'm not the only one that thinks you are a tool.
6-0>3-2.
Those are the only freaking stats that matter you idiot.
Fan_of_Four's_Crotch.
That's what his name should be. Boy, in ninety years when Favre does decide to retire, this guy is going to be pissed.
Hey, Fan_of_Four's_Crotch, can you admit that Aaron Rodgers is a good quarterback? Nevermind, you're probably in your basement right now crying tears of joy over Favre's highlight reel.
Damn I get sick of hearing about Farve's “late season fade”. It's bullshit. In 06 the pack won their last 4 games ending the season with a very emotional win vs the bears after bears had shut them out in the first game. In 07 Farve rocked all year and was a Tom Brady away from mvp. In 08 he ripped his bicep. So when was this “fade”?
DocBG says:
October 19, 2009 3:55 PM
@ the jackass calling himself Adam-Chris Scheftersen
Hey moron, when they played the vikes they actually had their uninjured starters playing, not people that usually play offense playing on their defensive line.... and i don't recall the vikes giving up 5 sacks, even to their starters. Plus the lions had Stafford and CJ in the game against the vikes, CJ is one of the best WR's in the league.... but yeah, your comparison makes a ton of sense doesnt it?
Another moronic packer fan who has absolutely NO SENSE of football, of that fact that injuries can play a HUGE role... but good point anyway you tool
----------------------------
To the jackass masquerading as some sort of doctor:
Oh, you're right. THAT Lions team is a very scary team. Watch out for a healthy team that's 1-21 over the last season and a half. They're dangerous.
Chickenfoot says:
October 19, 2009 4:56 PM
adampissandmoanerson is just fixated on yards because he mows them for a living.
See, I'm not the only one that thinks you are a tool.
6-0>3-2.
Those are the only freaking stats that matter you idiot.
---------------------------
If stats don't matter then why did you have a coronary when I said Jared Allen wasn't as good as Antwan Odom because Odom got more sacks against better linemen than Allen?
Because you're a tool, that's why.
pkrlvr says:
October 19, 2009 5:57 PM
Damn I get sick of hearing about Farve's “late season fade”. It's bullshit. In 06 the pack won their last 4 games ending the season with a very emotional win vs the bears after bears had shut them out in the first game. In 07 Farve rocked all year and was a Tom Brady away from mvp. In 08 he ripped his bicep. So when was this “fade”?
---------------------------
I've compiled the numbers just for you.
Over the last 5 years, here are Brett Favre's QB ratings:
Weeks 1-5: 89.7
Weeks 6-11: 88.9
Weeks 12-17: 69.4
So to answer your question, the fade is at the end of the season. Looking at the raw data, week 13 has historically been the beginning of the end.
Over the last 5 years Favre has a 92.7 QB rating in week 12. His average QBR drops to 46.7 in week 13. From there on out, it's up and down but never higher than 85 and never lower than 58.9.
You Viqueen fans are really obsessed with the Packers, aren't you. I guess I would be too if my team hadn't ever won the Superbowl and had to go after former Packers to have a chance to win it. What a complex you must have.
To me and many Packers fans, Favre has been lving on his reputation since the 03 playoff game against Philly. He threw the damn ball up for grabs in OT and had it picked off. But, he got a reprieve because of a roughing penalty and did the exact same thing on the next play with the exact same results.
I've always pulled for other NFC Central teams when the Packers are doing poorly, so I wish Favre and the Vikings well. But, don't be surprised if he tanks when things get tough and the games mean something.
Unfortunately for the Packers, you don't build great teams by blowing first and second round draft choices every year. That's how Detroit and Oakland build teams.
Adam-Chris Scheftersen says:
October 19, 2009 7:18 PM
Chickenfoot says:
October 19, 2009 4:56 PM
adampissandmoanerson is just fixated on yards because he mows them for a living.
See, I'm not the only one that thinks you are a tool.
6-0>3-2.
Those are the only freaking stats that matter you idiot.
---------------------------
If stats don't matter then why did you have a coronary when I said Jared Allen wasn't as good as Antwan Odom because Odom got more sacks against better linemen than Allen?
================================
Because that statement is ludicrous and you know it.
I really didn't think you were that dumb, but evidently, you are.
Allen does it year in and year out, Odom had 1 good game against the worst Offensive line in the NFL.
Your arguements are pathetic. It's just one moronic statement after another with you.
Debating you is like debating Corky from life goes on.
You've fallen into the catergory of Bob and Jimmy.
You do realize that you are a laughingstock on this site, don't you? Even to your fellow packer fans?
I take back that i called you a tool. That's insulting to tools. Tools have some use, you, you're just useless.
Wow, Adam. To think people were saying I had too much time on my hands. You need a hobby, and by that I mean other than trying to convince people the Pack is better than the Vikings. They aren't, and I'll be the first to admit it.
Bob-"Continued good things"? Five sacks a game average is a good thing?!!
Be real people. We have a lot of work to do, and I don't think we have time to do it. 9-7 at best, playoffs unlikely.
Beer Cheese Soup says:
October 20, 2009 3:17 AM
Wow, Adam. To think people were saying I had too much time on my hands. You need a hobby, and by that I mean other than trying to convince people the Pack is better than the Vikings. They aren't, and I'll be the first to admit it.
----------------------------
Don't be an idiot. I've NEVER said the Packers are better than the Vikings. If you'd like to dispute that, go ahead and use that little search button in the upper right corner and begin looking.
And as I've pointed out many times, I fully expected the Packers to lose on 10/5. I simply answered a question by a clueless Vikings fan (I know, that group is about as exclusive as the phone book). He asked why people think Favre tanks at the end of the season. I crunched the numbers. It took about 5 minutes on NFL.com and 15 minutes with Excel. No big deal.
Do the numbers mean Favre will definitely flounder at the end of this season? Nope. Do they show a trend? You bet.
I offer statistics that you don't want to hear about.
Yo deflect them like they don't mean anything.
Aikman's ratings are valid and the NFL is considering using them for thier rankings. But, nope, that's not good enough for you.
Cling to the fact that the Packers were in the game with the Vikings, when an overabundance of stats, articles and Video refutes your ludicrous statements.
You know what's funny? That you actually think you could get a vein to pop out in my head.
I laugh at you and everything you post. It's painfully obvious that you have no clue about football and my guess is life in general.
I don't need to call you out Adam, you are calling yourself out. It's plain for anyone to see that you don't need any help whatsoever, making an ass out of yourself.
Keep posting and keep proving to everyone on this site that you are:
Pissandmoanerson; Lord of the Asshats.
There you go beer; this is why I throw stones at this guy.
Obsessed to the point of madness, twisting stats any which way he can to make himself feel better.
Condescending foolish pricks like him are the reason I find it so hard to wish the Packers well.
Yep. I know, we got them too.
But this guy deserves every criticism and insult I hurl at him.
Why he feels the need to refute every anti-packers post is beyond me.
It must be raining where he is and he can't go to his lawnmowing job today?
Chickenfoot says:
Condescending foolish pricks like him are the reason I find it so hard to wish the Packers well.
Yep. I know, we got them too.
But this guy deserves every criticism and insult I hurl at him.
Why he feels the need to refute every anti-packers post is beyond me.
__________________________________
Now you know how I feel. You're right, you have them too. A LOT of them. I'll call them out no matter what team they pull for though, and that includes Adam and Bob.
More of the same from chicken. Thanks for proving my point.
Exactly which stats have you pointed out? Aikman's rankings? Please provide a link to prove that the NFL is "considering using them for thier rankings." The only place I've ever seen those rankings are:
- One internet forum posting
- Troy Aikman's twitter feed