December 05, 2019, 06:52:11 AM

Author Topic: "Prevent" Defense  (Read 3977 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline AZPackfan

  • Starter
  • ***
  • Posts: 248
  • Karma: +0/-0
"Prevent" Defense
« on: October 19, 2015, 09:53:20 AM »
Ok, I admit to something I'm just not clear on. What exactly is supposed to be the purpose of a prevent defense, which doesn't seem to prevent anything - except winning? Though true, pack did make a good goal line stand at the end of yesterday's game.
"Wherever you go, you represent the team. You will talk like, you will look like and you will act like the most dignified professional in your hometown" - Vince Lombardi to his players.

Offline claymaker

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3084
  • Karma: +16/-2
Re: "Prevent" Defense
« Reply #1 on: October 19, 2015, 10:06:04 AM »
The purpose is to allow yards for time, and hopefully make it a make or break scenario to win the game. Ideally you run a prevent defense when the other team needs more than one score win the game. You save the prevent when it's one score or less than 7-8 points to win/tie the game when there isn't a lot of time left, usually >1 minute imo. How many possessions the other team has left also comes into play, which is why you trade the yards for time.

Green Bay wasn't playing a prevent style defense on that last drive or really all game. They were forcing the issue with blitzes. Now that everything has settled I'm less disappointed with that adjustment, but still think tight coverage would have been a better answer.
« Last Edit: October 19, 2015, 10:15:18 AM by claymaker »

Offline The GM

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2950
  • Karma: +75/-5
Re: "Prevent" Defense
« Reply #2 on: October 20, 2015, 05:33:45 AM »
Its designed to waste time by protecting the sidelines and clock stoppage.  The middle is often vulnerable to large gains. 

Online ricky

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6337
  • Karma: +80/-35
Re: "Prevent" Defense
« Reply #3 on: October 20, 2015, 11:10:04 AM »
Over 500 yards passing and only 20 points? The defense worked. So, the stats show the defense is not good against the pass? Who cares? It's how many points the other team scores. As long as your team scores more, that is the only stat that counts. Not pretty, but winning "ugly" is always better than losing.
"My hopes are not always realized, but I always hope." Ovid

Offline golfman

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11870
  • Karma: +9/-1
Re: "Prevent" Defense
« Reply #4 on: October 20, 2015, 04:24:29 PM »
Over 500 yards passing and only 20 points? The defense worked. So, the stats show the defense is not good against the pass? Who cares? It's how many points the other team scores. As long as your team scores more, that is the only stat that counts. Not pretty, but winning "ugly" is always better than losing.

Ricky, in 2010 we were winning and I came here and correctly pointed out our defense would not win a championship. I was lambasted, so while your statement is correct in the sense of a particular game. It is quite elementary and ill advised regarding the ultimate goal of a Championship.

For the record, I am not comparing this defense to 2010. This defense can be dominant if we can get Raji, Perry and Burnett back and stay healthy. This defense can win us a Championship.

 twocents)
"Make the Packers Great Again! "

Offline Zyvlyn

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1363
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: "Prevent" Defense
« Reply #5 on: October 20, 2015, 07:57:14 PM »
Over 500 yards passing and only 20 points? The defense worked. So, the stats show the defense is not good against the pass? Who cares? It's how many points the other team scores. As long as your team scores more, that is the only stat that counts. Not pretty, but winning "ugly" is always better than losing.

Ricky, in 2010 we were winning and I came here and correctly pointed out our defense would not win a championship. I was lambasted, so while your statement is correct in the sense of a particular game. It is quite elementary and ill advised regarding the ultimate goal of a Championship.

For the record, I am not comparing this defense to 2010. This defense can be dominant if we can get Raji, Perry and Burnett back and stay healthy. This defense can win us a Championship.

 twocents)

I think you meant 2011.  Our defense WAS good enough to win the Super Bowl in 2010.  2011 was the year that the defense sucked and people who pointed it out were lambasted because the Packers kept winning despite it.  Well, til the end, anyway.

I totally agree with your point though.

Offline B

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4298
  • Karma: +21/-12
Re: "Prevent" Defense
« Reply #6 on: October 20, 2015, 08:35:42 PM »
I think it is a bit of revisionist history to call the 15 - 1 Packer 2011 playoff loss to the eventual Super Champion New York Giants the result of inadequate defense.

The fact is that the offense did not show up in the first quarter and was pretty much AWOL throughout a game in which:

 ~~ according to ESPN Stats & Information had the Packers with six drops, tied for the most by any NFL team in a game that season.
 ~~ with the Packers committing a season-high four turnovers, including a fumble by Rodgers as he was trying to hit a wide-open Jennings in the third quarter. They had only two plays go for more than 20 yards, a 29-yard run by running back James Starks and a 21-yard pass to receiver Randall Cobb once the game was out of hand.
 ~~ a game in which only eight of Rodgers' 46 attempts traveled 15 yards in the air, and he completed only two of them.

Are you saying it was the defense's fault that a team Packers team that dropped 30 passes in 16 regular season games dropped six in one playoff game? Or it was the defense that causes a team to commit four turnovers in one game when it had only 14 in the regular season? Perhaps it was Dom Capers that caused fullback John Kuhn fumble for the first time in his career?

It wasn't the defense that made Aaron miss a wide open Greg Jennings on goal line and settle for a FG on the first drive, nor was it the defense that caused Aaron to fire a fast ball pass just out of the reach of a wide open Finley that would have tied the game. The Packers defense did not cause Aaron to have a QB rating 69.1 any more that it caused Starks, Kuhn and Rodgers to giveaway key fumbles at critical times during the game.

Don't get me wrong, the defense failed to carry the offense when it was misfiring in the game with the Giants had so often in the Super Bowl run the season before, but any objective look at how the Giants who the Packers had beaten a few short weeks before will admit that it was the offense that dropped (literally) the ball in that upset loss to the eventual Super Bowl Champions on that cool January night...


Maybe you all can claim you did, but I sure did not see it coming.
The Green Bay Packers never lost a football game.
They just ran out of time.
-Vince Lombardi

Offline golfman

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11870
  • Karma: +9/-1
Re: "Prevent" Defense
« Reply #7 on: October 21, 2015, 04:30:44 AM »
There was NOTHING REVISIONIST ABOUT IT! I was lambasted for starting a thread stating our defense would cost us at the most inopportune time. It did and yes the offense didn't have a great game against the Giants. The fact is our defense was not capable of stopping people and it finally caught up to us.

This year's defense is different.

Yes I did mean 2011 thanks for catching that.
"Make the Packers Great Again! "

Offline Zyvlyn

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1363
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: "Prevent" Defense
« Reply #8 on: October 21, 2015, 04:56:56 AM »
I think it is a bit of selective reading to infer that anyone who suggests that the historically bad 2011 Packers defense was unable to win a championship would place no blame on the offense for choosing to have their worst game of the season in the playoff loss to the eventual Super Champion New York Giants.

The fact is that the offense struggled at times while the defense was pretty much AWOL throughout a game in which:

~~ The Giants scored points on 7 out of 11 possessions (not counting the final possession where they knelt).  And one of those four scoreless drives was because of a blocked field goal from just outside the red zone.
~~ The Giants offense was allowed to convert on more than 50% of their third downs (8 out of 15).
~~Eli Manning earned 10 yards per passing attempt and Ahmad Bradshaw earned 5.25 yards per rush.

Are you saying it was the offense's fault that a Packers defense, which only sacked opposing QBs 29 times during the season was only able to sack Eli Manning once in 36 dropbacks?  Or was it the offense that allowed the Giants to score more than 30 points in one game, when it had happened 4 times already that season?  Perhaps it was Mike McCarthy who missed 8 tackles in that game after missing 109 tackles throughout the season?

It wasn't the offense that gave up 4 plays of 20+ yards (and 4 more plays of 17+ yards), nor was it the offense that only caused one turnover in the game, despite living and dying by turnovers throughout the whole season.  The Packers offense did not allow Eli Manning to have a QB rating of 114.5 any more than it forced the Giants to punt only twice in the game.

Don't get me wrong, the offense failed to carry the defense as it so often had throughout the season to that point, but any objective look at how the Giants beat the Packers, who had allowed them to score 35 points a few short weeks before will admit that the offense failing in that game was "surprising", while the defense failing in that game was "expected" in that upset loss to the eventual Super Bowl Champions on that cool January night...



Maybe you can claim you were suprised by it, but I sure did see it coming.

Offline golfman

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11870
  • Karma: +9/-1
Re: "Prevent" Defense
« Reply #9 on: October 21, 2015, 05:09:50 AM »
I think it is a bit of selective reading to infer that anyone who suggests that the historically bad 2011 Packers defense was unable to win a championship would place no blame on the offense for choosing to have their worst game of the season in the playoff loss to the eventual Super Champion New York Giants.



That is where you miss the point I am making in 2011 and here now. The offense was going to have an off game, in the playoffs because the best teams are in the playoffs. My statements were that defense would not be able to rise to the occasion and thus, no championship. The rest is irrelevant to the discussion, PERIOD! That was exactly what happened. That is why one dimensional teams do not win Super Bowls, sans, dominant defenses with mediocre offenses. It doesn't work the other way around.

This year we are packing a defense. I like our chances. I see the San Diego game as an aberration. Others may see it as a trend. Time will tell but this defense has too many guys who are playing too well for it to happen against non-elite QB's. Maybe even against elite QB's if we have a full compliment of our best players.
"Make the Packers Great Again! "

Offline Zyvlyn

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1363
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: "Prevent" Defense
« Reply #10 on: October 21, 2015, 05:19:50 AM »
I think it is a bit of selective reading to infer that anyone who suggests that the historically bad 2011 Packers defense was unable to win a championship would place no blame on the offense for choosing to have their worst game of the season in the playoff loss to the eventual Super Champion New York Giants.



That is where you miss the point I am making in 2011 and here now. The offense was going to have an off game, in the playoffs because the best teams are in the playoffs. My statements were that defense would not be able to rise to the occasion and thus, no championship. The rest is irrelevant to the discussion, PERIOD! That was exactly what happened. That is why one dimensional teams do not win Super Bowls, sans, dominant defenses with mediocre offenses. It doesn't work the other way around.

This year we are packing a defense. I like our chances. I see the San Diego game as an aberration. Others may see it as a trend. Time will tell but this defense has too many guys who are playing too well for it to happen against non-elite QB's. Maybe even against elite QB's if we have a full compliment of our best players.

Yes.  I know.  I'm agreeing with you there.  Our defense in 2011 was not good enough to win it all.  This year it may be.  We shall see.

Offline B

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4298
  • Karma: +21/-12
Re: "Prevent" Defense
« Reply #11 on: October 21, 2015, 06:13:02 AM »
There was NOTHING REVISIONIST ABOUT IT! I was lambasted for starting a thread stating our defense would cost us at the most inopportune time. It did and yes the offense didn't have a great game against the Giants. The fact is our defense was not capable of stopping people and it finally caught up to us.

This year's defense is different.

Yes I did mean 2011 thanks for catching that.

I agree that this is a different team and a different season, but to ignore the stinker egg that Aaron Rodgers and the Packers offense laid that day in 2011, knocking them out of the playoffs and attributing the loss to the defense is revisionist - whether or not you predicted the defense would cost the 15 - 1 Packers the championship.

Like you brother golf, I like what this '15 defense has shown they are capable of achieving and the depth it is developing is more reminiscent of 2010 than 2011. 
« Last Edit: October 21, 2015, 06:21:45 AM by B »
The Green Bay Packers never lost a football game.
They just ran out of time.
-Vince Lombardi

Offline golfman

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11870
  • Karma: +9/-1
Re: "Prevent" Defense
« Reply #12 on: October 21, 2015, 07:03:23 AM »
There was NOTHING REVISIONIST ABOUT IT! I was lambasted for starting a thread stating our defense would cost us at the most inopportune time. It did and yes the offense didn't have a great game against the Giants. The fact is our defense was not capable of stopping people and it finally caught up to us.

This year's defense is different.

Yes I did mean 2011 thanks for catching that.

I agree that this is a different team and a different season, but to ignore the stinker egg that Aaron Rodgers and the Packers offense laid that day in 2011, knocking them out of the playoffs and attributing the loss to the defense is revisionist - whether or not you predicted the defense would cost the 15 - 1 Packers the championship.

Like you brother golf, I like what this '15 defense has shown they are capable of achieving and the depth it is developing is more reminiscent of 2010 than 2011.

B,

Eventually the offense was going to have a stinker of a game. On that day the defense has to pick them up. Our 2011 version of defense was incapable of that, it is a fact. One I pointed out prior to it happening. There is nothing revisionist about that whatsoever.

That is why this is a Championship team, IMO and 2011 was not as I pointed out PRIOR to it happening. If you think that is revisionist, perhaps that word doesn't mean what you think it means.
"Make the Packers Great Again! "

Offline B

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4298
  • Karma: +21/-12
Re: "Prevent" Defense
« Reply #13 on: October 21, 2015, 07:47:08 AM »
golf, I would never insult you by suggesting that you don't know the definition of revisionist... I'm a bit surprised by your suggesting I don't.

Our disagreement is simply a difference of opinion about how the 2011 season ended. IMO there was nothing inevitable about the Packers inexplicable offensive egg they laid against the 9 - 7 (at the time) New York Giants. I think Aaron Rodgers and the offense (which was banged up) choked that day - and I don't think it was inevitable.

Z, I never suggested that the 2011 defense played well that day or that season. Ted and Mike built an offensive Juggernaut that carried the team to 15 - 1 and home field throughout, while neglecting the defense from a personnel stand point. What I am suggesting is that responsibility for that loss on January 15, 2011 lays more on the footsteps of a team that increased its drops by 333.3% and turnovers by 460% in that game and a QB passer rating that drops from 122.5 for the season to 69 for that game is a much better explanation for the loss then saying it was on the defense.

Dropped passes, missing wide open receivers, sacks and turnovers that led to short fields was what killed the Packers that day. Did the defense rise up and rescue the Packers? Hell no, but the offense with their inability to hold on the ball and sustain drives did not help them one bit that day in getting the opportunity to do so IMO

Historic spilled milk at this point, but an interesting discussion about differing opinions.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2015, 07:49:19 AM by B »
The Green Bay Packers never lost a football game.
They just ran out of time.
-Vince Lombardi

Offline B

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4298
  • Karma: +21/-12
Re: "Prevent" Defense
« Reply #14 on: October 21, 2015, 08:29:13 AM »
BTW in 2011 the two teams that played in the Super Bowl (+ the Packers) defensive rankings:

Scoring defense:

13-3 New England #15, 342 points, 21.4 pts. per game
 15 - 1 Green Bay #19, 359 points, 22.4  pts. per game
 09 - 7  New York #25, 400 points, 25.00 pts. per game

Total Yardage Defense:

 15 - 1 Green Bay #32, 6585 yds, 411.5 per game
13-3 New England #31 6577 yds, 411.0 per game
 09 - 7  New York #27, 6022 yds, 376.4 per game

So, at least in 2011, a great defense was not a good predictor of who would be the eventual NFL Champion


The Green Bay Packers never lost a football game.
They just ran out of time.
-Vince Lombardi