PDA

View Full Version : Capers rediscovers success that eluded him in Houston


beerlover
01-16-2011, 04:43 PM
Excellent article written by Alan Burge. http://www.examiner.com/houston-texans-in-houston/capers-re-discovers-success-that-eluded-him-houston?CID=examiner_alerts_article

Now the Texans are going back to the 3-4 under new coordinator Wade Phillips, disposed coach of the Cowboys. I'm hoping for similar results, is that expecting too much :wadepalm:

JB
01-16-2011, 04:45 PM
I am expecting those results also.

spurstexanstros
01-16-2011, 05:15 PM
lol @ this thread...seriously

he is successful in GB because he doesnt control the offense.

Its not run run pass or first down hit the ground

I dont give the qb ruiner much credit for doing his job with above avg players.

beerlover
01-16-2011, 06:05 PM
maybe I should have used a different title "Wade discovers success that eluded him in Dallas?"

or maybe its just too painful for some to stomach :toropalm:

Norg
01-17-2011, 12:00 AM
It took him a while tho didnt GB have that 2 year record of 7-9 and then 8-8 post farve ???

I hope it does not take wade 2 years to get this D turned around which it prob will

BetaV1
01-17-2011, 12:08 AM
The Packers defensive success following the switch to 3-4 is an extraordinary thing that really doesn't happen. The Chiefs this year took a big step forward defensively when they made the switch to 3-4. I'm not expecting a Packer-like turnaround, but I'm expecting one on par with the Chiefs.

J_R
01-17-2011, 12:35 AM
It took him a while tho didnt GB have that 2 year record of 7-9 and then 8-8 post farve ???

I hope it does not take wade 2 years to get this D turned around which it prob will

Talking about Capers right? Last year was his first year on the job. Packers were 11-5 last year, 10-6 this year. Not sure how accurate this is but according to wiki: Green Bay's defensive ranking in his first year improved to second in the league in 2009, from 21st in the league in 2008. In spite of being decimated by injuries in the 2010 season, Capers' defense got even better. The defensive unit ranked 2nd in Scoring Defense, 5th in Total Defense, 2nd in Interceptions, 2nd in Sacks, and 1st in Opposing Quarterback Passer Rating.

Runner
01-17-2011, 01:24 AM
Talking about Capers right? Last year was his first year on the job. Packers were 11-5 last year, 10-6 this year. Not sure how accurate this is but according to wiki: Green Bay's defensive ranking in his first year improved to second in the league in 2009, from 21st in the league in 2008. In spite of being decimated by injuries in the 2010 season, Capers' defense got even better. The defensive unit ranked 2nd in Scoring Defense, 5th in Total Defense, 2nd in Interceptions, 2nd in Sacks, and 1st in Opposing Quarterback Passer Rating.



Two years? Wow, this league moves fast.

Lucky
01-17-2011, 07:45 AM
Two years? Wow, this league moves fast.
This only proves that the Packers aren't built for the long haul. It takes six years (at least) to build a winning team. Ask any of the experts on Kirby.

thunderkyss
01-17-2011, 10:05 AM
Talking about Capers right? Last year was his first year on the job. Packers were 11-5 last year, 10-6 this year. Not sure how accurate this is but according to wiki: Green Bay's defensive ranking in his first year improved to second in the league in 2009, from 21st in the league in 2008. In spite of being decimated by injuries in the 2010 season, Capers' defense got even better. The defensive unit ranked 2nd in Scoring Defense, 5th in Total Defense, 2nd in Interceptions, 2nd in Sacks, and 1st in Opposing Quarterback Passer Rating.



Not that I want to take anything away from Capers & the Packers. They've done an amazing job, & I'd love to have that defense here in Houston.

But... who are they playing? In 2010, they had the 22nd toughest schedule in the league (.488 (we have never played a below .500 schedule in the last 5 years.)). In 2009, they had the 30th toughest schedule (.428). In 2008, they had the 12th toughest schedule (.531)

I understand you play the schedule you're given, & you do what you do. But there are so many things that go into the success/failure of a coach, outside his control.

Like I said, give credit where credit is due.. he took a weak schedule (something we've never had) and dominated. Plain & simple. But the jump from the 2008 Packers defense to the 2009/2010 wasn't all Dom Capers.

As an aside.... for a little perspective. Capers first year with the Packers, was 2009. From 2002-2008, the Packers defense averaged 17 in the league. As stated before, in 2009, they were 2nd in the league.

Frank Bush's first year as D Coordinator was also 2009. The Texans defense averaged 22nd from 2002-2008. In 2009, they were 13th. If you factor in S.O.S. that is a pretty similar jump.

In 2010, both schedules got tougher. The Packers fell to 5th on defense. The Texans fell to 30. Both teams had injuries to deal with. Both teams had young players in crucial roles..... one team handled it better than the other.

Texan_Bill
01-18-2011, 10:54 AM
Excellent article written by Alan Burge. http://www.examiner.com/houston-texans-in-houston/capers-re-discovers-success-that-eluded-him-houston?CID=examiner_alerts_article

Now the Texans are going back to the 3-4 under new coordinator Wade Phillips, disposed coach of the Cowboys. I'm hoping for similar results, is that expecting too much :wadepalm:

Meh, apples to oranges.

Dom Capers as the Texans HC pretty much let Fangio do his thing and remained somewhat hands-off. Second, The Texans defense for the first couple of years wasn't complete full-on garbage. They had some players (Sharper, Glenn, Coleman, Wong, Walker and Posey). Their numbers were middle of the pack, but that relates to that garbage they called an offense who was constantly going 3 and out and/or also putting them in bad position on the field.

That said, I also kind of agree with TK about the Packers schedule. It's wasn't a world beater schedule that they played.

Although props for holding Vick in check two weeks ago.

El Tejano
01-18-2011, 10:59 AM
Meh, apples to oranges.

Dom Capers as the Texans HC pretty much let Fangio do his thing and remained somewhat hands-off. Second, The Texans defense for the first couple of years wasn't complete full-on garbage. They had some players (Sharper, Glenn, Coleman, Wong, Walker and Posey). Their numbers were middle of the pack, but that relates to that garbage they called an offense who was constantly going 3 and out and/or also putting them in bad position on the field.

That said, I also kind of agree with TK about the Packers schedule. It's wasn't a world beater schedule that they played.

Although props for holding Vick in check two weeks ago.


With our current offense, we would be a pretty darn good team if we had that 2002 defense.

Double Barrel
01-18-2011, 11:12 AM
"Strength of schedule" is so completely overrated unless your team is in the NFC east.

Capers has the benefit of being on a team with a solid HC, something NONE of our DCs - including Wade - have not had the luxury of enjoying in the past 9 seasons.

GP
01-18-2011, 11:28 AM
"Strength of schedule" is so completely overrated unless your team is in the NFC east.

Capers has the benefit of being on a team with a solid HC, something NONE of our DCs - including Wade - have not had the luxury of enjoying in the past 9 seasons.

You mean there's not that much difference between .488 and .500?

I largely agree. The Jets got rolled by the Pats to the tune of like 45-3 IIRC. Then the Jets come back and essentially roll the Pats in the playoffs.

You know who is hurt by "Strength of Schedule"? Poor teams who suck. Because the good teams find a way to win no matter what. They at least know how to win when it counts the most (i.e. the Jets).

I have a feeling the Jets are going to win the Super Bowl. Much like Bettis finally got his ring, I think LT gets his this year. You don't make the AFC Title Game two years in a row, with a rookie QB and then a sophomore year QB, only to go home empty-handed. I think they beat the Steelers (the Ravens had them on the ropes and let them back into it). I think they win the SB. And everyone will have to chew on that for a long time.

The Jets winning the Super Bowl will be the nail in the coffin of the theory that you have to avoid "trauma" of major change. There's not a team still in the playoffs that represents traumatic, major change like the Jets do. They canned Mangini, got rid of Favre, hired a first-time HC, started a rookie QB right out of the gate, and made traumatic moves in free agency. And, what a shocker! It paid off. All of this in the midst of sexual misconduct situations with Favre when was QB there, the situation with a shock jock female reporter who was supposedly harrassed, and now with Mr. Toe Licker whore-out-my-wife and his sideline special teams trickery. All proof that you can win in spite of multiple traumatic situations.

We're a Hee-Haw skit.

http://www.magnetmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/HeeHaw550.jpg

Double Barrel
01-18-2011, 12:16 PM
You know who is hurt by "Strength of Schedule"? Poor teams who suck. Because the good teams find a way to win no matter what.

QFT! :bravo:

Good post, man. I quoted this specific part because "strength of schedule" seems to be the excuse for losing teams. We hear it year after year with the Texans, but that's life in the NFL.

JB
01-18-2011, 12:56 PM
QFT! :bravo:

Good post, man. I quoted this specific part because "strength of schedule" seems to be the excuse for losing teams. We hear it year after year with the Texans, but that's life in the NFL.


Just out of curiosity, have you ever heard this from the Texans, or just from us blinded by the homer lights fans?

Double Barrel
01-18-2011, 01:23 PM
Just out of curiosity, have you ever heard this from the Texans, or just from us blinded by the homer lights fans?

Nah, just Texans Nation and the related media outlets.

The Texans are far to savvy to put any type of 'excuse' in advertisement. Most teams will not mention strength of schedule, though, and probably because winning teams don't need excuses and it's a tough term to put a happy, shiny spin on for losing teams.

thunderkyss
01-18-2011, 01:51 PM
You mean there's not that much difference between .488 and .500?

FYI, the Texans haven't had a .500 schedule either, not in the last 5 years.

The difference between a .488 schedule & a .506 is 2 games against teams that don't suck. .488, that's like playing the NFC West all year long.

Offensively, look at where the teams they played are at.... bottom of the league. I understand they had something to do with that, but not 16 weeks of it.

They've got some good wins, Chicago (the division winner) the Giants, the Jets (goose egg) so it's not like I'm saying they are truly worthless.

Like I said, they took a weak schedule, & dominated. Had they been middle of the road against that schedule, that would say something totally different about that team.

Like the Cardinals & Panthers. Two of the easiest schedules in the league & they couldn't buy a win.

I largely agree. The Jets got rolled by the Pats to the tune of like 45-3 IIRC. Then the Jets come back and essentially roll the Pats in the playoffs.

You know who is hurt by "Strength of Schedule"? Poor teams who suck. Because the good teams find a way to win no matter what.


Sort of. Indianapolis with a sub 500 schedule will win 13-16 games (when they're healthy). Playing a winning schedule, they'll probably win 10-12.

I'm also not trying to use S.O.S. as a crutch, or an excuse. Just saying.

thunderkyss
01-18-2011, 02:08 PM
The Jets winning the Super Bowl will be the nail in the coffin of the theory that you have to avoid "trauma" of major change. There's not a team still in the playoffs that represents traumatic, major change like the Jets do. They canned Mangini, got rid of Favre, hired a first-time HC, started a rookie QB right out of the gate, and made traumatic moves in free agency.

While I don't buy McNair's trauma argument, I think yours is just as off base.

It's just like building a house, you have to have a good foundation before you can start mucking with the pieces, or it will all fall apart.

The problem with that argument though, is after going 8-8, 8-8, then 9-7 against winning schedules (>.500) you would think that foundation was there... that it was solid.

Julius Peppers, Kyle VandenBosh, & Andrew Kampan would have made a big difference on this defense.

I'd have preferred a DT, but none of the top free agent DTs moved. so I'm not going to go there.

None of the safeties moved, none of the CBs moved....

So I'm not really sure what anyone is/was expecting there.

thunderkyss
01-18-2011, 02:18 PM
One more thing about the Jets.

At the end of the 2009 season, I held the belief, that we were the same team. Both had 9-7 records. They had the best rushing attack & the best defense, we had the best offense (& in my mind at that time, run defense).

I thought their previous year's 9-7 record, our 8-8.. put us in practically the same tier (if you believe in the tiering system).

I was wrong. Their ability to beat winning teams (this year) is something we don't have.

This year, we even lost to bad teams. The Cowboys, the Giants (at that time), the Broncos, the Chargers....

I'm questioning Kubiak's ability to lead this team farther, just like the rest of you. But if we get swept by any of our division rivals in 2011, I'll be questioning McNair's ability to lead (like some of you are now).

El Tejano
01-18-2011, 03:00 PM
One more thing about the Jets.

At the end of the 2009 season, I held the belief, that we were the same team. Both had 9-7 records. They had the best rushing attack & the best defense, we had the best offense (& in my mind at that time, run defense).

I thought their previous year's 9-7 record, our 8-8.. put us in practically the same tier (if you believe in the tiering system).

I was wrong. Their ability to beat winning teams (this year) is something we don't have. This year, we even lost to bad teams. The Cowboys, the Giants (at that time), the Broncos, the Chargers....

I'm questioning Kubiak's ability to lead this team farther, just like the rest of you. But if we get swept by any of our division rivals in 2011, I'll be questioning McNair's ability to lead (like some of you are now).

And you can really point to their HC and say he's the reason. That dude came in here and started talking confidently about his team from day one, and that has pumped up his team.

thunderkyss
01-18-2011, 03:30 PM
QFT! :bravo:

Good post, man. I quoted this specific part because "strength of schedule" seems to be the excuse for losing teams. We hear it year after year with the Texans, but that's life in the NFL.


Try to remember this post, this thread. We'll look at Dom Capers S.O.S. & how his defense does next year.

It's not an excuse & I've said that many times before. If this team was who we thought they were, we'd have had a winning record. I don't think I've heard anyone say that Kubiak should be back, because he had such a tough S.O.S. not McNair, not the media, not Kubiak, & none of the homers.

If I'm wrong, please correct me.

To expect the Lions to be above 500 this year with a .508 schedule is just asinine. To expect the Ravens to be above 500 in spite of a .508 schedule is a little more practicle.

Texans & Titans shared a .547 schedule..... they both went 6-10. If you want to know where the Texans are, they're right there with Jeff Fischer's team (think about that the next time you rag on the Titans).


If nothing else, S.O.S. is just another tool to use when evaluating a teams performance..... in my mind anyway. We went 6-10 against the toughest schedule in the NFL. Nothing to brag about.

If next years schedule works out to be .466 (which I know it won't) & we go 12-4, I won't think too much of that record.

Double Barrel
01-18-2011, 03:42 PM
Why NFL Strength of Schedule is Meaningless (http://www.madduxsports.com/blog/nfl-handicapping-why-nfl-strength-of-schedule-is-meaningless-6060/) :yawn:

thunderkyss
01-18-2011, 05:45 PM
Why NFL Strength of Schedule is Meaningless (http://www.madduxsports.com/blog/nfl-handicapping-why-nfl-strength-of-schedule-is-meaningless-6060/) :yawn:

it depends on what you're talking about.. meaningless for what?

& I'd appreciate a synopsis of the links content, I'm not able to get to it from work.

GP
01-19-2011, 09:20 AM
While I don't buy McNair's trauma argument, I think yours is just as off base.

It's just like building a house, you have to have a good foundation before you can start mucking with the pieces, or it will all fall apart.

The problem with that argument though, is after going 8-8, 8-8, then 9-7 against winning schedules (>.500) you would think that foundation was there... that it was solid.

Julius Peppers, Kyle VandenBosh, & Andrew Kampan would have made a big difference on this defense.

I'd have preferred a DT, but none of the top free agent DTs moved. so I'm not going to go there.

None of the safeties moved, none of the CBs moved....

So I'm not really sure what anyone is/was expecting there.

You can have a good foundation and really eff up other parts of the home, TK.

Good foundations need good subcontractors to come in and finish it out. If Kubiak is the general contractor of this building project, he gets an "A" for the foundation, and an "F" for finishing out the house.

If Bob looked at it like we are, in terms of building a house, he would have fired the general contractor and replaced him with someone who has a track record of finishing out the project. And not even his new d-coord is someone who has a track record of finishing out things (if he becomes HC here). Oops.

That's a great analogy. Thanks for bringing that up.

thunderkyss
01-19-2011, 09:52 AM
You can have a good foundation and really eff up other parts of the home, TK.

Good foundations need good subcontractors to come in and finish it out. If Kubiak is the general contractor of this building project, he gets an "A" for the foundation, and an "F" for finishing out the house.

That's a great analogy. Thanks for bringing that up.

Who would you have brought in?

Here's a list of all the 2009-2010 free agents..... (http://profootball.scout.com/a.z?s=127&p=9&c=12&nid=83&lnid=83&yr=2010) pick a guy, any guy who went from one team to another, that would have undoubtedly helped our defense.

I understand what you're saying. Look at the Jets, look what they did. Look at the Ravens, look what they did.... I get it. Both teams signed offensive Free agents.

IMO, the only guys that would have helped, were DEs & a good argument can be made for why we didn't go after the FA DEs.


I'm not coming at this from a "save Kubiak" P.O.V. Fire him.. I agree with that decision. Keep him, hire a DC.... because Kubiak obviously can't...... That's not me.

I'm talking about from a franchise standpoint.

If you can't get your General Contractor the materials he needs do you fire him? Or do you fire the guy in charge of getting the materials?
If the supply of materials is deminished because of El Nino, do you fire the materials guy anyway?

Or do you take a look at what they had to work with, & go from there.

You picked the GC, because he builds good houses (teams) did he do a good job or a bad job with the material he had to work with?????????

You picked the Material man, because you believed that he could do a good job in that department? Didn't get us anything in the offseason... was that the fault of your guy, or the market? After the season started, did how'd he do?

Your answers to those questions, my answers to those questions most likely don't match McNair's answers.. I don't agree with what is "obviously" McNair's answer, but I can understand them.

Excuses

I know, but that's all they're giving us right now.

Second Honeymoon
01-19-2011, 02:21 PM
Capers wasn't a bad head coach. He just had crap to work with because Meddling Bob and Charlie The Moron forced him to start Carr game after game, regardless of his performance, ability, and work habits.

There is no coach that could have done any better with what Capers had to work with in Carr. In fact, Capers and his coaches did more with Carr than anyone else ever has...including Kubiak. but you can put lipstick on a pig and he is still a pig. And even amidst all the homering and excuse mongering that Carr had, we are now building the same battery of excuses for Kubiak and his pathetic coaching ability just like we did with Carr's pathetic QBing ability. If the Texans and their more mentally challenged err homering fans spent as much time actually analyzing their team and being honest as they do making excuses and rationalizations, the Texans would be a dynasty. Just pathetic excuse after excuse. What is it going to be next year.

Oh I know.
1. Wade didn't have enough time to implement his defense.
2. No offseason to properly implement defense.
3. <Insert player name here> got hurt.
4. Other useless and overdone excuses.

Screw all that. The Texans suck and it starts up top with McNair especially who enables proven losers like Kubiak and Smith.

The fact is that McNair screwed the pooch on this one and he is screwing the pooch on keeping Kubiak. It all goes back to him being a pathetic owner more concerned about making friends and making money than he ever will be about bringing a much deserved and overdue winner to this town.

McNair, you sucked then and you still suck. You haven't learned a damn thing.

Dumb as dirt.

infantrycak
01-19-2011, 02:42 PM
Capers wasn't a bad head coach. He just had crap to work with because Meddling Bob and Charlie The Moron forced him to start Carr game after game, regardless of his performance, ability, and work habits.

HWWNBN was an albatross but Capers was a bad head coach. He made a fundamental error. He was a defensive guru and took a hands off approach in his era of expertise. Then he meddled in the offense. That's a recipe for disaster. He had an image of an offense built with the idea the defense would be good and then never intervened to make sure the defense became good.

PS-let's not forget firing Palmer and hiring Pendry at OC.

GP
01-19-2011, 03:44 PM
Who would you have brought in?

I love how THIS is always the definitive comeback.

'What player would YOU have wanted?"

"What coach would YOU have wanted?"

Every year, some college or some NFL owner identifies and brings in a guy who can head coach.

It happens. I know it sounds far-fetched. But it happens. I don't make a living off of scouting potential head coaches and players for an NFL team. I leave that to the ones who make their living that way. But when it seems to doing the due diligence and a lack of a certain amount of risk (A.K.A "trauma"), it begins to make you wonder about the team you're rooting for as a fan.

Does my owner have enough sack to do the unconventional, or is he continuing to try old methods?

Now his theory seems to be that the offense is OK and the defense will become OK, and therefore 1 + 1 = Championship. That's the theory, no? That theory is flawed because the Texans offense, led by Gary Kubiak himself (and we all know this is the truth, not speculation) is hampered by slow starts and an inability to close out opponents when they DO get a lead. Unless the other team's wheels fall off, and then we get the win. The Redskins have to forget what got them the lead in the first half, which they did and they abandoned what got them the lead. The Raiders have to trot out Gradkowski, injured and torn up from earlier in the game, which they did and it cost them the game as well. When the wheels fall off other teams, Gary's offense can close out the deal.

The offense is built for success, no doubt. But it's not achieving total success on a consistent basis. This means we will be looking at Strength of Schedule again, waiting for the NFL Math Gang to determine (at week 8) what combination of wins and losses by Texans and other AFC foes will secure us a spot in the Wildcard round. Podium tapping. Pissed off soapers around here.

Nobody wanted that for 2011. I would take a bad 2011 season if it meant having a non-Kubiak bad 2011 season. He's done it enough. Time to let some other guy field the questions on Monday.

GP
01-19-2011, 04:09 PM
If you want to know the name of "a guy," TK...

I was clamoring for Gene Chizik to come here as DC, to replace Richard Smith. Chizik helped win the Rose Bowl for UT, turning that defense into a top-ranked D after having done the same thing at Auburn prior to that. He was available in 2006, same year as Kubiak signed on as HC with Houston, but Chizik went to coach at Iowa State.

Granted, he went on to be a head coach in NCAA. I was wanting him as d-coord, check my post history, but he went to be a HC. Had we found a way to land him either as DC or HC, which I know is a stretch when looking at it in hindsight, we might have found "a guy" who was on his way up. Even as d-coord, what would have happened had he built a typcial Chizik defense for us? The possibilities are pretty wild: We would have either had a great offense (Kubiak) & a great defense (Chizik) that culminated in what we now expect Kubiak & Wade to do...or we could have fired Kubiak this year and promoted Chizik up to HC. Possibilities, TK.

Back to the history of Chizik, and my post history on him: He hit a speed bump in Iowa State, though, and my post history also reveals that I stated maybe he's "just a coordinator, and not HC material?" but then he goes on to Auburn and wins. Maybe he learned from mistakes at Iowa State, like Belichick learned from mistakes in Cleveland and elsewhere? Maybe it's easier to recruit to Auburn than to Iowa State (likely so)? Regardless, he puts parts together and makes it work.

He made his defenses work. He then became a HC and made all the parts, offense and defense, work.

That's "a name" that I actually am on-record as having supported a long time ago.

thunderkyss
01-19-2011, 07:16 PM
If the Texans and their more mentally challenged err homering fans spent as much time actually analyzing their team and being honest as they do making excuses and rationalizations, the Texans would be a dynasty. Just pathetic excuse after excuse. What is it going to be next year.


Please try to understand, I'm not making excuses for Kubiak.... or McNair.

I think McNair screwed up.. & should have fired Kubiak (or Rick Smith... I think one of the two should have gone).

All I'm doing is trying to provide possible reasoning for why he decided to keep him.

thunderkyss
01-19-2011, 07:19 PM
I love how THIS is always the definitive comeback.

'What player would YOU have wanted?"

"What coach would YOU have wanted?"

Every year, some college or some NFL owner identifies and brings in a guy who can head coach.


I'm sorry, I thought we had moved back to the "should've signed a bunch of free agents in the offseason" discussion.

thunderkyss
01-09-2012, 09:20 PM
Not that I want to take anything away from Capers & the Packers. They've done an amazing job, & I'd love to have that defense here in Houston.

But... who are they playing? In 2010, they had the 22nd toughest schedule in the league (.488 (we have never played a below .500 schedule in the last 5 years.)). In 2009, they had the 30th toughest schedule (.428). In 2008, they had the 12th toughest schedule (.531)

I understand you play the schedule you're given, & you do what you do. But there are so many things that go into the success/failure of a coach, outside his control.

Like I said, give credit where credit is due.. he took a weak schedule (something we've never had) and dominated. Plain & simple. But the jump from the 2008 Packers defense to the 2009/2010 wasn't all Dom Capers.

As an aside.... for a little perspective. Capers first year with the Packers, was 2009. From 2002-2008, the Packers defense averaged 17 in the league. As stated before, in 2009, they were 2nd in the league.

Frank Bush's first year as D Coordinator was also 2009. The Texans defense averaged 22nd from 2002-2008. In 2009, they were 13th. If you factor in S.O.S. that is a pretty similar jump.

In 2010, both schedules got tougher. The Packers fell to 5th on defense. The Texans fell to 30. Both teams had injuries to deal with. Both teams had young players in crucial roles..... one team handled it better than the other.

So....

I got to thinking. The Packer's defense doesn't look all that hot anymore. What happened?

They've still got Capers, they've got all their players..... what happened?

Now, I ask this, knowing that our defense is awesome.

I also know next year we will face a tougher schedule. We'll play the NFC North (Greenbay, Detroit, Chicago, Minnesota) The AFC East (New England, NYJets, Buffalo, Miami) & the top teams from the AFC West (Denver) & the AFC North (Baltimore). Plus the Colts will be better, so will the Titans & the Jags.

How do you think our defense will look in 2012 & why?

Marcus
01-10-2012, 04:29 AM
So....

I got to thinking. The Packer's defense doesn't look all that hot anymore. What happened?

They've still got Capers, they've got all their players..... what happened?

Now, I ask this, knowing that our defense is awesome.

I also know next year we will face a tougher schedule. We'll play the NFC North (Greenbay, Detroit, Chicago, Minnesota) The AFC East (New England, NYJets, Buffalo, Miami) & the top teams from the AFC West (Denver) & the AFC North (Baltimore). Plus the Colts will be better, so will the Titans & the Jags.

How do you think our defense will look in 2012 & why?

I think the defense will be awesome if they don't do anything stupid, like not re-signing Mario. People said at the beginning of the preseason that Mario would be a failure at linebacker in the 3/4. Turns out, while "still learning the new position" he was leading the league in sacks before he went down. But I consider that somewhat of a blessing in disguise, as it allowed Barwin and Reed to develop. But if Mario comes back, with J.J. Watt a year under his belt, along with the secondary getting better . . .

. . . I think this defense will be downright frightening to other teams.

And LOL reading the earlier posts on this thread.

Txn_in_FL
01-10-2012, 09:49 AM
So....

I also know next year we will face a tougher schedule. We'll play the NFC North (Greenbay, Detroit, Chicago, Minnesota) The AFC East (New England, NYJets, Buffalo, Miami) & the top teams from the AFC West (Denver) & the AFC North (Baltimore). Plus the Colts will be better, so will the Titans & the Jags.

How do you think our defense will look in 2012 & why?

NFC North? Green Bay... Super Bowl rematch? LOL
Chicago... offensive mess.
Detroit... if Stafford stays healthy it will be good.
Minnesota... Seriously?

AFC East is what it is. NE leads the pack and I think everyone else is in shambles. Rex Ryan is Glanville 2.0 and is a non issue at this point. I think nest year will be a complete debacle for them.

Baltimore always sucks.
Denver... we shall see.

I dont buy that the Colts will be better an the Titans... a healthy Texans team should rule the AFC South for quite a while.

Dutchrudder
01-10-2012, 10:50 AM
So....

I got to thinking. The Packer's defense doesn't look all that hot anymore. What happened?

They've still got Capers, they've got all their players..... what happened?

Now, I ask this, knowing that our defense is awesome.

I also know next year we will face a tougher schedule. We'll play the NFC North (Greenbay, Detroit, Chicago, Minnesota) The AFC East (New England, NYJets, Buffalo, Miami) & the top teams from the AFC West (Denver) & the AFC North (Baltimore). Plus the Colts will be better, so will the Titans & the Jags.

How do you think our defense will look in 2012 & why?

I'm not quite sure, but it would help to have 2010 rankings compared side-by-side to 2011 rankings to see how much it changed. I thought maybe the schedule differences would have an effect on it, but in 2010 the Packers played the NFC East and AFC East, 49ers and Falcons + NFC North x2. That's a pretty tough schedule as it is. In 2011 they played the NFC South, AFC West, Rams and NYG, which is a bit easier of a schedule IMO.

I did watch a few Packers games this year. I remember in the Raiders game that they were up by 4 scores at half while holding Oakland to 0 points and it seemed like they called off the dogs in the 2nd half. Raiders scored 16 points after that, which isn't a lot, but you could tell they were playing loose. Another game like that was their first game against Detroit. They shutout the Lions for the first 3 quarters and then the Lions got some garbage TDs in the 4th. Same sort of thing happened against the Vikings.

But that really doesn't explain all of it. They couldn't stop some of the better offenses in the league like the Saints, Chargers, Giants, Cam Newton and the 2nd game against the Lions. Stafford threw for 520 yards in week 17 @GB. Cam Newton started to get a lot of hype after throwing over 400 yards in week 2 against a supposed top 5 defense. There's something really wrong with the Packer's D this year, but I'm not sure what exactly changed. They lost Cullen Jenkins, but that's about all I can think of.

Hervoyel
01-10-2012, 11:18 AM
I think the defense will be awesome if they don't do anything stupid, like not re-signing Mario. People said at the beginning of the preseason that Mario would be a failure at linebacker in the 3/4. Turns out, while "still learning the new position" he was leading the league in sacks before he went down. But I consider that somewhat of a blessing in disguise, as it allowed Barwin and Reed to develop. But if Mario comes back, with J.J. Watt a year under his belt, along with the secondary getting better . . .

. . . I think this defense will be downright frightening to other teams.

And LOL reading the earlier posts on this thread.

I am entirely behind this thought. Mario was starting to "click" right about the time he went down and I think we were looking at the start of something really big. "Demarcus Ware type big" I think. If we bring Mario back and add that on top of what we already get from Reed & Barwin we're going to be that thing nobody wants to play. A defense that doesnt' drop off very much no matter who you give a breather to. I think we'll be the kind of defense that requires just non-self destructive play from the offense to get to the post-season like the Ravens had on their Super Bowl run. We're close to that now but Mario and another competent CB (who may be one of the guys we have right now after a year of good coaching) would put us over the top.

Double Barrel
01-10-2012, 03:04 PM
I think the defense will be awesome if they don't do anything stupid, like not re-signing Mario. People said at the beginning of the preseason that Mario would be a failure at linebacker in the 3/4. Turns out, while "still learning the new position" he was leading the league in sacks before he went down. But I consider that somewhat of a blessing in disguise, as it allowed Barwin and Reed to develop. But if Mario comes back, with J.J. Watt a year under his belt, along with the secondary getting better . . .

. . . I think this defense will be downright frightening to other teams.

And LOL reading the earlier posts on this thread.

How good do you think the defense will be in 2012 if Wade is not here? I can't help but dread that potential outcome, simply because it is very obvious that he is the brain behind the turnaround.

I hope they can sign Mario, because I'd love to see him continue to grow into his role. He showed us something that would have elevated his status on a national level if he had played the entire season.

There are some funny posts looking back a year later, including my own! My tank was running on fumes as a fan last January, and the cynicism was where my mind was at. Very cool to be in a different place a year later. I was never going to stop being a fanatic for the Texans, but it's nice to be a happy fan with something to actually celebrate other than just having a team in Houston. :)

thunderkyss
01-10-2012, 03:09 PM
I think we'll be the kind of defense that requires just non-self destructive play from the offense to get to the post-season like the Ravens had on their Super Bowl run. We're close to that now but Mario and another competent CB (who may be one of the guys we have right now after a year of good coaching) would put us over the top.

To be that kind of defense, we need some scorers on the defensive side of the ball. An Ed Reed, type of player that takes it back for 6 whenever he gets his hands on the ball.

JJ Watt did it... can he do it again? Bryce McCain did it... can he do it again? I know Jjo & Manning say they'd like to do it, but they have yet to show the ability.

Hervoyel
01-10-2012, 06:03 PM
To be that kind of defense, we need some scorers on the defensive side of the ball. An Ed Reed, type of player that takes it back for 6 whenever he gets his hands on the ball.

JJ Watt did it... can he do it again? Bryce McCain did it... can he do it again? I know Jjo & Manning say they'd like to do it, but they have yet to show the ability.


I thought they both did it..... but plays got wiped out by stupid penalties.

Or was that someone else? I can't remember Who are you again? Where am I?

Carr Bombed
01-10-2012, 06:13 PM
I don't understand the title of this thread...

Capers never rediscovered anything that eluded him here. Last I checked he's not the head coach of the Packers, he's always been a good DC. He simply got his "day job" back.