Green Bay Packers Roundtable: Breaking Down the Lions Visit To Titletown

In BR's weekly Green Bay Packers roundtable discussion, our dedicated Packers' writers Chris Coombs, Carter Bierwirth, Ian Hanley and myself answered five questions about the Pack heading into their game Sunday against the Detroit Lions.

1. In light of Frank Zombo’s decent performance Monday night, has he done enough to move ahead of the largely ineffective Brad Jones for the foreseeable future?

Chris Coombs: I think Zombo appears, from the limited gametime we’ve seen, to be the more natural pass-rusher. Jones is decent against the run and I think he can do the job. To be honest, I think both are still in development and in Dom Capers’ scheme I’d have Zombo as the starter as he seems to have decent hussle off the edge.

If anything I think the whole idea of a second pass-rushing outside linebacker next to Matthews is rather overplayed. We have the likes of Nick Barnett, who’s a criminally underrated and somewhat underused blitzer, BJ Raji looks to have upped his game significantly, and Cullen Jenkins has made one of the smoothest transitions from 4-3 to 3-4 I’ve seen.

Carter Bierwirth: Since Brad Jones seems to be quite injury prone, I want Zombo to be the starter. He is aggressive and slightly faster then Jones has been.

I’m not sure how good he is in coverage as of yet but it can’t be any worse or better then what I’ve seen from Jones in his short time here. Could swing either way but I’ll go with the much more natural and injury free undrafted rookie.

Ian Hanley: Yes he has. Mike McCarthy stated in his Wednesday press conferences that Zombo is the starter, mainly due to injury issues with Jones, but I don’t remember watching a Packer game this year and noticing the play of Brad Jones. Jones creates almost zero pass rush.

Zombo has two sacks and has as many solo tackles as Jones in limited playing time. The Packers need someone other than Clay Matthews to provide a pass rush from the outside linebacker spot. I’m not sure if Zombo is the long term solution at that spot, but for this year he is the Packers best option.

Zach Kruse: In Mike McCarthy's eyes, this question has been answered for this week. Zombo will start ahead of Jones Sunday, and for good reason. Zombo has been on the field every day for the Packers, and Jones has struggled with injuries.

In my mind, Zombo and Jones have a similar skill set, so I see nothing wrong with giving Zombo a start he deserved. Many will remember his penalty Monday night, but you can't forget his sack in the first half, and the fact that he really laid the wood to Jay Cutler on his penalty.

I like the aggression he's shown, and if he can stay healthy, there is no reason why he can't be the starter opposite Clay Matthews for the remainder of the season.

2. Do you believe Packers GM Ted Thompson will address the glaring need at running back position or will he make due with what the roster provides?

Chris: I'd be stunned if Thompson addresses anything during the season, unless there’s a deal where the Packers are getting a complete steal. As I’ve said umpteen times before, trading Hawk or indeed TJ Lang leaves us thin at their respective positions, and if Ted trades a pick for a veteran player I’d be shocked.

I think he’ll wait and see what he has in Dimitri Nance, especially after his recent success with undrafted players like Ryan Grant, Sam Shields, and Zombo.

I think the run game could be helped just as much by better run-blocking, as Clifton is a non-factor in that department, and there were no holes consistently opened up against the Bears by any of the linemen. Bulaga would be an instant upgrade and maybe Lang over Tauscher as well, if Colledge is hurt then Jason Spitz might be worth a look too.

Lastly I’m just not sure that there’s value in any of the prospective candidates that are around the league–either as free agents or trade fodder. If this was the Marshawn Lynch of two or three years ago then things may be different, but I’m yet to be convinced that he can stay healthy and out of trouble. The only other option talked about is Brandon Jacobs who I think is done in the league.

Carter: That would be the million dollar question. After the run games terrible show that fateful night I still don’t see Thomson worrying about it. The whole plan was to go in relying on pass so I’m pretty sure they didn’t plan on showcasing the mediocre run game.

The Bears do have one of the best run defense in the league and at least Kuhn showed some knack for power running. I’m pretty sure Thomson will not address this as to him it’s not a “dire” need for the team. Maybe that will change when we need a running game to win, but odds are nothing changes until after the season.

Ian: I think what the Packers do at running back will be dictated by two factors.

The first is the play of Dimitri Nance. If Nance can learn the system and be more effective than Brandon Jackson and John Kuhn, I think the Packers will probably stick with what they have. If Nance does not perform at a higher level than Kuhn or Jackson they may look elsewhere, which brings be to the second factor.

Who’s available? It’s not like there are a ton of productive, NFL caliber running backs looking for work. A trade for Marshawn Lynch sounds great, but Buffalo reportedly wants a starting offensive lineman and a second-round pick for him, which is way more than I or I believe Ted Thompson would give up for him. Thompson made the mistake of going into the season with only two running backs on the roster and now the Packers are paying the price.

Zach: If he does, it will be last second. In all reality, I wouldn't expect anything unless things get really bad in the Packers backfield. The vote of confidence McCarthy gave the running game after the Monday night debacle is another sign that the Packers have no inclination to make a roster move.

Lynch would fit the offense nicely, but there's no way Thompson gives up a third or fourth-round pick for him. All the Hawk-for-Lynch talk can stop too because there is no way that's happening.

Packers fans are going to have to take a wait-and-see approach. We all know Thompson won't make a spur of the moment type move to bolster the backfield.

3. Was the Packers’ 18 penalties a mirage or something that will continue to cause Green Bay problems? And who is more to blame for the Packers’ problems with penalties, coaches or players?

Chris: I think it’ll be a problem all year, although not to the extent of Monday night. 18 is a one time thing in my view, like the Baltimore game last year which was particularly memorable from last year for taking penalties to another level. I don’t think it’s going to go away, but at least there’s some encouraging signs of improvement on last year.

The main problem that I see with the flags is that they’re not all on the young players. I’ve heard a lot of fans saying that we’re the youngest team in the league and all, but just as many of the penalties are falling on veterans like Woodson, Colledge, and Tauscher. This suggests to me that it’s a combination of both players and coaches getting it wrong, I certainly don’t trust McCarthy to get it fixed.

Carter:  Not quite sure yet. It was a very intense game with the Bears on MNF and the zebra’s were quick to call anything on the Packers in general, but we have all seen the weakness this team has for penalties.

I was hoping that after a pretty good start in terms of discipline this issue wouldn’t crop up again, but that’s just wishful thinking. I want to say it’s just a one game incident thanks to just that night in general, but there's too many factors to go through. We’ll find out the next few weeks for sure.

As for the cause, I would like to think that it’s not all McCarthy in this instance. Clearly some of the penalties on the field were a result of overall aggressive play or “rookie” mistakes. That and Peppers drawing off our offensive lineman about three times in a row. I wont factor that to the coach especially when veteran players like Tauscher and Woodson are the ones drawing penalties. I’m more prone to blame McCarthy for his poor handling of the red flag.

Ian: I think 18 penalties is somewhat of an anomaly, but there is no reason to think the Packers won’t continue to be heavily penalized this season. In Mike McCarthy’s tenure as head coach the Packers have always been one of the most heavily penalized teams.

What killed the Packers Monday night was the timing of the penalties, which negated two interceptions, a touchdown, and lead to numerous Bears first downs.

Both the coaches and the players bare some responsibility for the Packers penalty problem. The players know the rules and it is their responsibility to follow them during the game. Sure, there are situations where penalties are inevitable, but some of the penalties on Monday night were completely inexcusable.

The fact that the Packers, under McCarthy always seem to have penalty problems lead me to believe the Packers coaching staff does not place enough of a priority on playing disciplined football.

Zach: The 18 penalties probably won't happen again for a long time, but my guess is that the penalties problem will stick with the Packers all season.

I was really hoping that the Packers had exorcised their penalties demon, but the bright lights of MNF brought it right back. Good football teams get you out of your comfort zone and make mistakes, and that's what the Bears did to the Packers. I hate to say it, but I'd predict the penalties to be an issue in a lot of the Packers big games this season.

And to be honest, it's on the players. Coaches can only do so much, and it's the players who need to take responsibility for their actions. That includes every player, too. This wasn't just a "young player" problem, it was a team wide issue.

4. If the Packers don’t add another running back through a trade or free agent, can the Packers be as successful as they want to be this season?

Chris: I think they can but it’s becoming a lot harder. If Rodgers leads us all the way to a Super Bowl with no running game then he’ll be a league MVP without a doubt. I’m starting to have my doubts that he can get enough from Jackson as a rusher to keep defenses honest, but I think with Jackson you have to play to his strengths and use more screens, short passes and tosses.

I think that if they’re intent on keeping Clifton, then playing either Lang or Bulaga at right tackle is an option because I’m not convinced that Tauscher has enough left in the tank to be able to be a force in a scheme of that nature. I’m not sure about Clifton either for that matter, but the seemingly blind loyalty he’s receiving is a worry to me.

Carter: Another good question, one that I’m pretty sure Ted and Mike are willing to let play out through the year. We all know that TT is stubborn about his system, and he is confident that the players he have in the positions they’re in will bring him success.

That’s not a bad theory unless the player in that position doesn’t develop at all. Brandon Jackson is EXCELLENT in third down situations, I’ve said that since we drafted him, but as of yet he has absolutely NO burst through a hole and can’t seem to find a hole anyways.

In the open field the guy is wonderful, but in a crowd I don’t think he can find a snowball in a blizzard. To answer the question, I honestly don’t think they can. Although this is a pass happy league now, a good run game is the best way to counter excellent pass defenses. That’s just offensive coaching 101. Perhaps they can go all out pass and get far, but I wouldn’t put any money on it.

Ian: Possibly, but it will make it much more difficult. Without at least the threat of a running game, opposing defenses will key in on the Packers passing game. The Packers are good enough to win a lot of games on the strength of their passing game and defense, but if they get to the playoffs and have to play more well balanced teams they may struggle.

The Colts had the fewest rushing yards in the league last year and made it to the Super Bowl, but they at least had the threat of Joseph Addai and Donald Brown. The Packers do not have a running back that can make an opposing team pay for only rushing four, and dropping everyone else into coverage.

Zach: If the running game is only as effective as it has been in the first two games after Ryan Grant's injury, there is no way the Packers can make the Super Bowl. It's that simple.

That said, I don't think the running game will be as bad as it has been. This week will be a good test, as the Lions are still pretty porous against the run. If we can't get something established against Detroit, we'll be hard pressed to get a running attack started against anyone.

The Packers season will turn into Aaron Rodgers vs. the world, and as appealing as that sounds, we probably won't fulfill our dreams of playing in the Super Bowl if that's the case.

5. If the Packers lose Sunday, is it possible coach Mike McCarthy is on the hot seat?

Chris: No. Let’s not get ahead of ourselves, the Pack should still make the playoffs and are still the class of the division–although Chicago appears to have made serious ground on them. McCarthy has faults but he’s a good coach who has a winning record and two trips to the playoffs.

He wasn’t on the hot seat when we lost to Tampa last season and I’m sure he’s not now, just as Ted doesn’t make knee-jerk reactions with playing staff, he won’t with his coaches either. There’s no guarantee that a change of coach would bring about any change in fortune in any case.

The only scenario in which McCarthy is on the hot-seat is if we fail to make the playoffs–which I can’t see there being much danger of, even if we have more of a fight to win the division than many predicted.

Carter: I think that certainly other coaches in the NFL are in much hotter positions then Mike McCarthy is. I’m not down on McCarthy unless he pulls out the red flag.

The penalties issue? I’m not sure if it alone warrants McCarthy being in hot water. Rookies make mistakes and refs make calls, it’s not new. If the penalty situation continues to be an issue by the end of the season, then I’d say McCarthy is on the hot seat. Or maybe if he looses the next three games.

All and all I’m pretty sure he’ll be safe until the end of the season, but if they finish .500 or below he could very well be looking for a new home.

Ian: Absolutely not. If the Packers lose Sunday and they continue to struggle during the season and don’t make the playoffs I would think that at the end of the season he would be on the hot seat, but one loss, even against the Lions is not enough to put McCarthy’s job in jeopardy. 

Zach: He won't be on the hot seat, but the national scrutiny will be intense and immediate. No one in Packer land should accept a loss to the Lions in Lambeau either, but that won't mean Thompson will make a knee-jerk move.

Thompson and McCarthy work good together, and it'd take a lot more then a loss to the Lions to put his job in danger.

McCarthy would have to finish under eight or nine wins this season to really be worried about losing his job in Green Bay.

If you would like to be a part of the next Packers roundtable discussion, contact Zach on b/r or email him at [e-mail]. You can reach him on Twitter as well, zachkruse2.