Packers Snap Counts Vs. Chicago: Week 14, 2025

The Packers find enough answers to beat the Chicago Bears and take first place in the NFC North.

 

The Packers released Will Shephard from the 53-man roster and signed him to the practice squad.  The Packers signed Jordan Riley, a nose tackle who was released by the New York Giants, to the 53-man roster.  The Packers then claimed DL Quinton Bohanna off of Seattle's practice squad and moved Devonte Wyatt to the injured reserve list.  Bohanna, a 6th round pick in 2021, is on his fifth team but has managed to play 640 defensive snaps in the NFL. 

The Packers activated Jayden Reed from his practice window and released WR Malik Heath.  Heavy.com reports that Heath reposted a fan's comment wondering why the Packers hate Malik Heath so much. The Packers benched Heath in response to that implicit criticism of the coaching staff.  It remains to be seen whether The Packers want to sign Heath to the Practice Squad and it very much is unclear whether Heath wants to return or feels it is time to see if the grass is greener somewhere else.

The inactive players due to health were Edge Lucas Van Ness and WR Savion Williams.  OL Donovan Jennings, NT Nazir Stackhouse, and NT Bohanna were healthy scratches.  Stackhouse was not given an injury designation at all this week so his demotion appears to be based on merit rather than injury.  The coaches have said that Wicks and Golden were on pitch counts.

 

OFFENSIVE LINEMEN:

Player Snaps % STs
Tom 53 100 4/16%
Rhyan 53 100 4/16%
Walker 53 100 4/16%
Banks 53 100 4/16%
Belton 53 100 4/16%
Kinnard 6 11 4/16%
Morgan 0 0 4/16%
Monk     4/16%

 

The run blocking was good.  The Packers had a +0.16 EPA per running play, which is in the 93rd percentile.  For context, Chicago had an excellent +0.28 EPA per running play.  Per Pro Football Focus, the line managed just 0.80 yards before contact, with the running backs adding a terrific 3.7 yards per carry after contact.  For context, the Bears had 2.0 yards before contact and 1.9 yards after contact.  The Packers do like to run up the middle a lot, whereas the Bears are proficient running wide.  The Packers had 4 explosive runs.  Overall, the Packers gained 117 yards on 26 carries for a 4.50-yard average, with a long of 21.  The running backs averaged 4.17-yards per carry.  The Packers only had 1 negative run, though their success rate was more modest.  DL Grady Jarrett wreaked havoc inside (90.2 initial PFF grade).

The Packers allowed 13 pressures, including 1 sack, 10 hurries, and 2 throwaways.  The Bears blitzed liberally but the Packers generally picked up those blitzes very well, allowing just 2 unblocked pressures.  In any event, Love carved up the Bears when they blitzed by throwing 3 touchdown passes when blitzed.  PFF indicated the Packers had a passing EPA of 0.25, which is solid (73rd percentile) to very good.  Love had 2.89 seconds on average to throw.  Caleb Williams had 3.69 seconds to throw but that includes rolling out and flushes. 

Rhyan and Bank each allowed a hurry.  Rasheed Walker allowed the only sack.  Belton allowed 2 hurries and Tom allowed 4 pressures.  

 

RUNNING BACKS:

 

Player Snaps % STs Routes Targets
Jacobs 38 72   13 2
Brooks 8 16 16/64% 5 1
Wilson 8 15 5/20% 4 0

Josh Jacobs gained 86 yards on 20 carries (4.30-yards/carry) with a long of 21.  Jacobs found a crease to punch in a short run for a touchdown.  Jacobs earned his yards by breaking 5 tackles, including a couple on his long run.  Without the long run, Jacobs gained 65 yards on 19 carries (3.42-yards/carry).  Jacobs caught 2 passes for 6 yards with a long of 6.  Emanuel Wilson gained 10 yards on 3 carries (3.33-yards per carry).  Chris Brooks had no carries but caught 1 pass for 6 yards.

The Packers need to keep paying Jacobs.  PFF gave Jacobs an 82.8 initial grade.

 

QUARTERBACKS:

Player Snaps % STs
Love 53 100  
Willis DNP    

 

Love completed 17 of 25 (68%) for 234 yards (9.36 yards/attempt), with 3 touchdowns and 1 interception.  His passer rating was 120.7.  Love had 2 throwaways.  He torched the Bears when they blitzed, getting the ball out quickly and throwing 3 touchdowns when blitzed.  His interception was right to a defender.  PFF gave him an 81.0 initial grade.  Love had 1 designed run, which lost a yard.  There are reports that Love changed the play call at the line of scrimmage on at least a couple of his touchdown passes.  Green Bay should keep paying Love, for that matter.  

 

TIGHT ENDS:

Player Snaps % STs Routes Targets
Fitzpatrick 30 57 4/16% 9 2
Whyle 22 42 8/32% 11 1
Musgrave 21 40   9 4

 

Musgrave caught his both of targets for 22 yards with a long of 12.  He had another catch erased when the officials after a replay decided he failed to maintain control while falling to the ground.  Whyle caught his only target for 21 yards.  Fitzpatrick caught two passes for 14 yards with a long of 8.  None of the tight ends caught a pass in the second half.  

 

WIDE RECEIVERS:

Player Snaps % STs Routes Targets
Watson 44 83   21 4
Doubs 43 81   19 2
Reed 25 47   17 4
Melton 9 17 11/44% 5 2
Wicks 6 11   3 0
Golden 5 9   4 1

 

Watson caught all 4 of his targets for 89 yards, a 22.25-yard average, with a long of 41.  The Packers got Watson matched up on a safety on both of his touchdown receptions.  It is great to have a mismatch on the field.  PFF gave Watson an 83.8 initial grade.  Bo Melton did not play that many snaps but he caught 1 of his 2 targets for a 45-yard touchdown on a busted coverage.  Reed caught all 4 of his targets for 31 yards, including a big 18-yard reception on the game-winning drive to get the Packers into Bears' territory.  Reed also added 22 yards on 2 carries.  Reed played 1 snap when the Packers were in 12 personnel, with the rest of his snaps coming in 11 personnel.  Doubs (2 targets) and Golden (1 target) and Wicks (no targets) had no receptions.  Wicks and Golden were on pitch counts due to injury.  Doubs played a lot of snaps given that he had no receptions.  

 

DEFENSIVE TACKLES:

 

Player Snaps % STs
Brooks 47 67 5/20%
Wooden 43 61 5/20%
Brinson 27 39 3/12%
Riley 14 20 3/12%

Wooden had 3 tackles (2 solo).  Brooks had 3 tackles (1 solo) and a hurry.  Wooden and Brooks each had 1 run stop.  Brinson had 2 assisted tackles.  Jordan Riley had no official statistics but PFF assigned a missed tackle to him.  The unit was pretty stout in the first half, allowing 48 yards on 13 carries (3.69-yards per carry).  The defense appeared to visibly tire in the second half.  In the second half, the Packers allowed 90 yards on 19 carries, a 4.74-yard average, but even that is not disastrous against a run-heavy team.  The Packers gave up 4.31 yards per carry for the game as a whole, and they stopped the outside runs at which the Bears excel almost entirely.  Moreover, the Bears did not have an explosive run all game, as their long run was 9 yards. 

The Packers have decided to have only 4 defensive tackles active for their games this year.  It remains to be seen if the Packers will move to 5 DTs in the future.  I take leave to doubt such a move.  I think the Edge players got tired more than the tackles.  I like Stackhouse better than the Packers appear to, so I wonder whether the Packers feel they have a fifth DT who is worthy of being active.  I think a lot of the problem was that Caleb Williams can really move and at least for this game he was excellent at feeling and eluding pressure.  His rollouts and flushes meant defenders had to sprint often.       

 

DEFENSIVE ENDS:

Player Snaps % STs
Parsons 61 87  
Gary 40 57  
Enagbare 39 56 9/36%
Sorrell 11 16 19/79%
Mosby     21/84%

 

Enagbare had 4 solo tackles, plus a tackle for loss.  He had a sack and a hurry for 2 total pressures.  He received 2 unblocked pass rushes and 14 pass rushes altogether, for a 14.3% pressure rate.  He had 2 run stops.  Parsons had 1 assisted tackle and 2 quarterback hits.  PFF listed him with 2 run stops and 7 pressures (6 hurries, 1 QB hit) in 31 pass rushing snaps, an excellent 22.6% pressure rate.  Parsons set the edge on one end around that allowed Enagbare to lower the boom.  Gary had 2 solo tackles and 1 QB hit.  PFF listed Gary with 4 pressures (all hurries) on 28 pass rushes, a 14.3% success rate.  Gary had no run stops.  Sorrell had 1 assisted tackle and 1 hurry on 9 pass rushing snaps (11.1% pressure rate).    

The Packers time of possession in the first half was 16:44 but they finished with a TOP of 26:31, which means the Packers had the ball for just 9:45 in the second half, and Chicago had the ball for just over 20 minutes in the second half.  That disparity plus sprinting after Caleb Williams 36 times will tire out players.  The Packers did not get too much pressure from the tackles today.  Assuming that Van Ness is out for a while, finding a roster spot for Brenton Cox when he gets healthy seems like a good idea, both because he represents a good chance of being able to play well but also so the Packers can go four deep at Edge.  They play Chicago and Williams again, plus LaMarr Jackson and Baltimore, so they will be chasing fast quarterbacks in the remaining games. I think I would go with an extra Edge player being active rather than moving from 4 DTs to 5 TDs, at least against Chicago and Baltimore.    

   

LINEBACKERS:

Players Snaps % STs
Walker 70 100 3/12%
Cooper 70 100 1/4%
McDuffie 36 51 21/84%
Hopper 1 1 18/72%
Welch     7/28%

 

Walker had 9 tackles (3 solo).  PFF assigned 2 run stops to Walker.  He allowed 3 of 5 targets to be completed for only 24 yards, a 72.1 passer rating.  Cooper had 11 tackles (5 solo).  He had 4 run stops and no pressures on 4 pass rushes.  He allowed all 5 targets to be completed for 37 yards, and he allowed a 97.5 passer rating.  McDuffie had 5 tackles (2 solo).  He had no pressures (4 pass rushing snaps) and no stops.  He allowed 3 of 4 targets to be completed for 34 yards, good for a 139.6 passer rating allowed. Hopper had no defensive statistics but he had 3 assisted tackles and a forced fumble on special teams.  Welch had an assisted tackle on special teams.

It seemed to me that Chicago gained too many yards after the ball carrier was initially stopped when linemen pushed the carrier forward.  The front seven needs to swarm to the ball since the plays are not being whistled dead as soon as they used to be.  I can only think of a couple of plays where Jacobs got a big push from his linemen: most of his yards after contact are due to his own leg drive.

 

DEFENSIVE BACKS:

Player Snaps % STs
McKinney 70 100 8/32%
Williams 69 99 16/64%
Valentine 69 99  
Nixon 67 96 3/12%
Bullard 26 37 5/20%
Hobbs 10 14  
Anderson     18/72%
Olapado     14/55%
Hadden     10/40%

 

Mckinney had 7 tackles (3 solo).  PFF indicated that he allowed 1 of 2 targets to be completed for 24 yards, a 93.8 passer rating allowed.  Evan Williams had  6 tackles (4 solo) with a pass defensed.  PFF assigned 0 completions on 2 targets. He had 1 run stop and 1 hurry on 9 pass rushing opportunities.  Nixon had 2 solo tackles, 1 QB hit, 1 intercepiton and 1 pass defensed.  PFF credited Nixon with allowing 2 of 5 passes to be completed for just 11 yards. His interception was balanced by allowing a touchdown completion, though that was tight coverage.  Nixon had 47.9 passer rating allowed.  He was committed 2 penalties for 30 yards on the same drive.  The Packers need his physicality but it sure would be nice if he could play a cleaner game.  In the mean time, I can live with Nixon's foibles.  Bullard had 4 tackles (2 solo) and 1 QB hit.  He allowed 4 of 4 targets to be completed for 29 yards, a 96.9 pass rating allowed.  He had no stops and he missed a tackle.  Nevertheless, I thought Bullard was very active and played well.  Valentine had 4 tackles (3 solo).  He allowed 1 completion on 1 target for 27 yards, a 118 passer rating allowed.  Valentine had 1 stop.  The corners might have a bigger challenge next time if Odunze is healthy. 

Caleb Williams finished 19 of 35 (54.3%) for 186 yards (5.31 yards/attempt) and just a 76 passer rating.  The Bears scored just 21 points and they did not run wild.  That is a good defensive effort.  The blemish is that while Caleb Williams had only 32 passing yards in the first half, he exploded for 154 passing yards in the second half.  That is a productive half and there was a similar split in the rushing yards, with the second half being much better.    

  

SPECIAL TEAMS:

Whelan punted 3 times and averaged 48.5 per punt with 1 inside the 20.  McManus made all of his extra points but had a kickoff go out of bounds, giving the Bears the ball at the forty. 

All statistics nflgsis or pro football focus.

 

Photo coutesy of Sarah Kloepping, USA Today Network.

 

OL: 5.11 (not as high as the last few weeks)

RB: 1.02

TE: 1.38

WR: 2.49

DT: 1.87

DE: 2.16

LB: 2.53 (a very high number due to Chicago's run game)

DB: 4.44

 

 

 

 

 

PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHEESEHEAD NATION WEEKLY NEWSLETTER HERE.

__________________________

NFL Categories: 
0 points
 

Comments (67)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
jvole's picture

December 08, 2025 at 05:54 am

I wouldn't say the run blocking was 'good'. I would say it was 'ok'. Running backs, mostly Jacobs, did the most of the hard work. The pass blocking was 'very good' against a lot of blitzes.

0 points
0
0
T7Steve's picture

December 08, 2025 at 06:12 am

70 plays to 53. Is that the biggest discrepancy the Packers faced all season TGR? Must be the worst on a win. Maybe Ben had more changes planned than the Packers D prepared for.

It's a good thing Nixon made that game winning interception because he really pissed me off on that TD drive and thought he should have been benched, but who's behind him?

0 points
0
0
GregC's picture

December 08, 2025 at 06:58 am

It wasn't a TD drive by the Bears, it was a field goal drive. And the second penalty was obvious BS.

0 points
0
0
T7Steve's picture

December 08, 2025 at 07:17 am

Sorry, I should have said scoring drive. Just walk away. Easier said than done but He stuck his nose in someone else's fight, and the refs consider that escalating. The Bear threw the 1st punch but it's always the guy that reacts to the first punch that gets the flag.

0 points
0
0
Coldworld's picture

December 08, 2025 at 07:46 am

Punches normally get the flag. It was more of a face grab, but that usually does it.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

December 08, 2025 at 06:30 am

I would say the run blocking was good enough. I do not think it is likely to get better by changing personnel. A little more tush pushing might help.

The tackling is better this year. Not too many MTs and those are by guys who have other strengths. The packers are very good at defending the edges in the run game when Quay and Cooper are out there. McDuffie too, I guess. Next time GB has to try to take away Williams rolling or being flushed to his right and make him move to his left. Easier said than done.

One can hope that Jordan Riley or Bohanna can be stout against the run, at least. Probably have to wait to see what they have there.

Edit: From the PFF fantasy article not the recap I linked above:

"Watson and Doubs both played 88% of the snaps in 12 personnel and 77.8% of the snaps in 11 personnel. This was normal for Doubs, but it was the highest snap rate for Watson in a game this season. Reed immediately returned to his role of playing in the slot in 11 personnel, playing 88.9% of those snaps, finishing with one snap in 12 personnel." So, I am going to deduce that Reed played 24 snaps in the slot in 11 personnel, and that suggests that the packers played in 11 personnel on 27 snaps (24/27 = 88.88%). We have 73 snaps from TEs plus 11 from Kinnard. We still see a lot of condensed formations out of the packers.

0 points
0
0
jvole's picture

December 08, 2025 at 07:17 am

Agree on the tackling---It has been getting better year on year.

I wait for Larry McCarren to weigh in on all offensive line thoughts before I finalize my own :).

0 points
0
0
murf7777's picture

December 08, 2025 at 06:44 am

1st off, what a great WIN, felt so good to beat the bears.

Will BabeParilli come out today and tell us how bad Love is again? Hope not! Love showed us again why he is in the Top 10 QB’s in the NFL playing right now. You can certainly make a case for Top 5. His ability against Blitzes is one of, if not the best in the NFL.

Could Musgrave give us something really important yet? I think so because he can be a mismatch with his speed up the seam. He’s really done well these last couple of weeks. He will also help open up other routes to our pass catchers.

It was great to see Reed back, as I said yesterday, the YAC is back in our offense. Sign Watson to an extension now!

0 points
0
0
Coldworld's picture

December 08, 2025 at 07:52 am

I’m still irritated by the reversal of that long Musgrave catch. After it was called complete on the field I can see no basis for overturning it. That is what Musgrave should be used for and why.

Overall, I thought the officiating was oddly favorable to the Bears on pretty much everything. I’m not alleging bias, just doubting judgment.

0 points
0
0
Bitternotsour's picture

December 08, 2025 at 08:41 am

When that route was completed I immediately thought of you and that we'd finally utilized the resource the correct way. Also too, that was a completed ball. The booth did no favors to the Green Bay Packers yesterday. Maybe they were drunk.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

December 08, 2025 at 09:08 am

Didn't LaF have three challenges upheld yesterday?

I wasn't happy with the Musgrave reversal, but on the one field angle you could see the ball against the ground and moving. I can understand that reversal. The Williams fumble recovery, to me, looked like an incompletion, but it was a question of whether the ball actually touched the ground before Williams came out with it.

0 points
0
0
Bitternotsour's picture

December 08, 2025 at 10:03 am

That was an interception, not a fumble recovery. Maybe it confused the replay people. (who were probably drunk)

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

December 08, 2025 at 09:06 am

After the Packers played games early in the season where there were flags constantly, we've seen the refs keeping their flags in their pockets for the most part. I don't see there being any less holding and the like, they're just not being called...maybe that's a difference in officiating crews. Maybe it's a mandate handed down from league HQ.

0 points
0
0
Leatherhead's picture

December 08, 2025 at 09:29 am

I guess I don't know what a catch is anymore, because ever since I was about six years old, I would have recognized that Musgrave caught that ball.

There's favorable officiating, unfavorable officiating, and hose jobs. We didn't get much favorable officiating.

0 points
0
0
Bitternotsour's picture

December 08, 2025 at 10:04 am

The Ravens got hosed.

0 points
0
0
LambeauPlain's picture

December 08, 2025 at 12:34 pm

Don't know what an NFL catch is anymore. Apparently the zebra saw a blade of grass touch the football on Musky's catch.

In the Ravens/Steelers game the Baltimore WR caught the ball in the EZ, took two full steps and was letting up on the 3rd when the Pittsburg DB swatted the ball away. The zebras formed a herd for several minutes and decided NFL receivers now must take 3 complete steps with the ball firmly in control. Ruled incomplete.

That TD that was not called could end up changing the playoff picture. If the NFL does not want to create suspicions of game rigging/favoroing certain teams it better hurry up and snuff this stuff out.

For example, to get a clear picture of how malleable a holding call is...just watch Parsons on every pass rush. He's grabbed from behind, choked, surrounded and corralled...as the zebras watch Micah aloofly, while he is being held to the whistle.

0 points
0
0
Coldworld's picture

December 08, 2025 at 04:08 pm

I just saw that catch. That is a baffling decision indeed. This has to get sorted out.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

December 08, 2025 at 09:24 am

He'll be quiet until Saturday or Sunday, then cut/paste the same stuff again.

"Could Musgrave give us something really important yet? "

With the Packers playing more heavy sets (some by Kinnard) and rotating TEs, I'm happy with the contributions they got from Whyle, Fitz, and Musgrave in the passing game. If they were more credible blockers, the Packers probably don't need to use Kinnard so much...still, that heavy set throw to Whyle for a big gain was really nice.

"It was great to see Reed back, as I said yesterday, the YAC is back in our offense."

I think the Packers went out of their way to get him the ball early. If not just to get him involved, but to also put him on the radar of upcoming DCs. Reed in motion creates opportunities in opposing secondaries.

0 points
0
0
LambeauPlain's picture

December 08, 2025 at 12:41 pm

Watson and Reed and Love were nearly unstoppable. Doubs had some muggings from bares DBs but zebras ignored them. He's the third amigo we need to rely on 3rd down where the Packers are the best in the NFL.

Now get Wicks and Golden healthy. Hope Musky continues to be used to stretch the D. Can't double cover them all.

0 points
0
0
GregC's picture

December 08, 2025 at 06:47 am

This game played out a lot like the first game against the Bears last year--the one in Chicago--as the Bears ran a lot more plays and dominated time of possession, while the Packers had more big plays. In that game, the Packers averaged 8.5 yards per play, while the Bears averaged 5.8 yards per play. In this game, it was 6.5 for the Packers and 4.6 for the Bears. In both games, Jordan Love threw one interception. Caleb Williams threw none in last year's game, and one in this game, at the very end, so it was similar that way too. In both games, the Bears executed their grind-it-out offense nearly to perfection but still lost. I'm happy to be a fan of the team that makes more big plays.

I think Nazir Stackhouse is probably not as good as most fans think he is. Honestly, it's hard for me to tell what those interior linemen are doing, so I could be wrong. I expected him to play against the Bears, at least on early downs and in short yardage situations, but I guess they didn't even want him on the field against a mobile QB. At this point in his career, Stackhouse is basically a 4th-and-1 specialist, and opposing teams don't always run up the middle on 4th and 1 anyway. Would Stackhouse have been able to do much on that last play, when Caleb Williams rolled out? Karl Brooks was in pursuit.

I like your idea of going four deep at edge, if Cox or Van Ness can play. I felt bad for those edge players having to chase Caleb Williams around. One way or another, I hope they can contain him better next time. He is so fast and slippery.

It was disappointing that Dontayvion Wicks and Matthew Golden had to be on such strict pitch counts. Luckily, Bo Melton made a huge play, and good for him, but it would've been nice for Matthew Golden to be the guy who caught that TD on the blown coverage. He needs a boost of confidence. He hasn't even caught a TD yet. I'm still hoping for him to be a factor down the stretch.

0 points
0
0
T7Steve's picture

December 08, 2025 at 07:24 am

Don't forget that Bo made a very important non-play too. He got the offensive pass interference penalty on an underthrown Love pass that probably prevented another interception. That was a heads-up play.

0 points
0
0
Bitternotsour's picture

December 08, 2025 at 08:44 am

That was a brilliant play by a cornerback masquerading as a receiver. Deserved a game ball for that.

0 points
0
0
Leatherhead's picture

December 08, 2025 at 09:31 am

Actually, considering it was 3rd down, and we punted on the next play, we'd have probably been better off if the ball had been intercepted. A long interception on 3rd down is just as good as a punt.

0 points
0
0
T7Steve's picture

December 08, 2025 at 10:11 am

It wasn't as deep as the punt, and I don't think the Packers were penalized on the return. They've got to hang onto this punter. He's done pretty well and even in the cold did alright. I'll take a couple that he outkicks his coverage because by and large he's been spot on and flipped the field.

0 points
0
0
Spock's picture

December 08, 2025 at 11:07 am

If I recall correctly (ICBW) the Packers did give Whelan a (3 year?) extension earlier this off season. Ah, found it:
https://www.packers.com/news/packers-sign-p-daniel-whelan-to-contract-ex...

0 points
0
0
T7Steve's picture

December 08, 2025 at 11:26 am

Thanks. I remember now.

0 points
0
0
LambeauPlain's picture

December 08, 2025 at 12:51 pm

".... I don't think the Packers were penalized on the return."

Really? I thought that was impossible. Will wonders never cease!

0 points
0
0
Guam's picture

December 08, 2025 at 07:41 am

The Packers did go four deep at edge with Sorrell picking up 11 snaps to go with Parsons, Gary and Enagbare. I hope by the next Bears game Cox is back and Mosby is returned to the practice squad. That would give the Packers a five man rotation at edge and they will need it given how much Williams rolls out.

I disagree with TGR that the Packers didn't need a fifth DT. I thought the DTs looked as tired as the edges in the second half. I think the Packers could make Welch inactive for the game and use Stackhouse or Bohanna as the fifth DT. Bisaccia won't be happy with both Mosby and Welch not available for special teams but the DL plays a lot more than ST.

The Bears largely controlled the second half with their rollouts and running game and that needs to change in two weeks. The Packer DL visibly wilted in the second half and a fifth edge and fifth DT will help fix that. I don't particularly care whether the fifth DT is Stackhouse or Bohanna but Wooden and Brooks need to play fewer snaps next round against the Bears.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

December 08, 2025 at 09:30 am

Perhaps so. The coaches have a better idea than I do whether adding another IDL would help with endurance and keeping fresh legs on the field. PFF gave Stackhouse a dismal grade of 46 overall, though I think he is better than that,

I don't have a problem with Parsons playing 85 to 90% of defensive snaps but not if that puts him over sixty snaps. GB needs more juice when Parsons is off the field. If either comes back and plays like they did in the past, either Cox or LVN could help with pass rush, and both have been fine against the run. If it is LVN, he at least plays STs so Mosby arguably could be inactive. If it is Cox, he does not play STs. GB is going to keep Parsons, Enagbare, Gary and Sorrell active. If Cox gets added as the #5 DE, can GB afford to keep Mosby active as a 6th DE? I didn't see the closing speed I expected from Parsons in the second half, but maybe that was Williams vaunted speed. I see a site that suggests an unofficial time of 4.56 in the 40, though I was more interested in his other numbers.

Bottom line is I think adding one more Edge would mean a player who can make a difference, a better quality player, would get snaps, than if they made a 5th DT active. That DT ain't going to play a whole lot of STs, either. Who would I leave off of the 48 man active list:

WR 0 M.Golden, CB 16 B.Melton, K 17 B.McManus, P 19 D.Whelan, S 20 J.Bullard, CB 21 N.Hobbs, RB 23 E.Wilson, S 27 K.Oladapo, RB 30 C.Brooks, CB 36 K.Hadden, S 39 Z.Anderson, LS 42 M.Orzech, DL 53 A.Mosby, LB 54 K.Welch, DL 55 K.Enagbare, LB 59 T.Hopper, C/G 62 J.Monk, T/G 70 D.Kinnard, T/G 77 J.Morgan, TE 81 J.Whyle, TE 86 J. FitzPatrick, WR 87 R.Doubs, DL 91 W.Brinson, DL 97 J.Riley, DL 99 B.Sorrell, QB Willis?

I don't love any of the choices. Maybe Wicks (he is not in the list of substitutions above because he started at WR over Doubs, which is a bit interesting) or Golden.

0 points
0
0
Guam's picture

December 08, 2025 at 09:43 am

I don't see the question as a fifth edge versus a fifth DT, but rather needing both against a run heavy Bears (and probably the Ravens too) with a highly mobile QB. I agree that Parsons needs to play fewer snaps and Cox or LVN would be suitable candidates to pick up those snaps.

The issue I believe is who sits if they need ten defensive linemen. Mosby, Welch, Hadden and Oladapo generally don't play defensive snaps and only play special teams. While their loss would hurt special teams it would help the defense if it meant ten active DL. Welch had 7 ST snaps and Hadden 10 ST snaps - surely others could pick up those snaps in order to field a DL that doesn't get warn out in the second half.

0 points
0
0
LambeauPlain's picture

December 08, 2025 at 01:14 pm

The Packers did great in the first half going Mano a Mano with the bare OL. They got road graded in the second half but even then held the bares to below their per game rushing average.

The speed on the Packers Defense is very evident. Even when gassed in the 4th they still swarmed and tackled the ball carrier quickly and did not allow explosives. Who has a faster, better tackling defense?

I will admit until Keisean "I AM A CROOK!" Nixon completed his theft I was getting concerned about prospects in OT.

But I like this Defense! Even the smarmy Cowherd who endlessly praised how great the bares were in defeat, had very high praise for Hafley and the D.

Packers are one of 7 teams holding opponents to under 20 points per game. 6 of the 7 look to be playoff bound...Texans, Seabirds, Rams, Broncos, Patriots and the Packers. Chiefs are the 7th.

Also, the Packers have the best road record in the NFL at 4-1-1...should they have to travel in the playoffs.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

December 08, 2025 at 09:48 am

"If Cox gets added as the #5 DE, can GB afford to keep Mosby active as a 6th DE?"

If you're saying that activating Cox means that someone needs to go? Well, yeah, that's true. Mosby's a core ST player at this point and seems to be playing well in that spot. Cox doesn't play STs. I think it has a lot to do with who's hurt and who's active at other bottom-of-the-roster spots that feed into STs (Welch?).

0 points
0
0
murf7777's picture

December 08, 2025 at 09:55 am

It seems like the coaches might not think Stackhouse is ready; otherwise, why bring in two NTs with starting experience? Maybe he just hasn’t adjusted yet to the speed and physicality of the game at this level. That could always change down the road.

It will be interesting how they adjust their roster in the coming games.

0 points
0
0
Leatherhead's picture

December 08, 2025 at 11:22 am

I'm with you, murf. If there was a single body that the coaches thought was able to help, the coaches would put him out there. What would we be saving him for? Christmas?

0 points
0
0
Coldworld's picture

December 08, 2025 at 08:02 am

Possibly you are right about Stackhouse, though he’s made a few key plays of late. I think we chose to go with Riley as he’s now more mobile having slimmed down with the Giants. He seemed to play a broader NT role. Riley is much more experienced too.

It will be interesting to see if they go a different way next time. There’s no doubt that the Bears physically wore down our lighter interior and set out to do exactly that. TGR notes that “It seemed to me that Chicago gained too many yards after the ball carrier was initially stopped when linemen pushed the carrier forward.” That tends to happen if you can move the IOL backwards. Big men in retreat lose all leverage and their IOL are bigger men to start with before considering impetus. The decision to avoid heavy options may be seen as a tactical error in hindsight.

On a different issue, was Wicks on a snap count coming in or did he get hurt during the game (or warm up)? I was not clear from LaFleur’s comment, but interpreted it as the latter.

0 points
0
0
Spock's picture

December 08, 2025 at 11:22 am

From CHTV's Jocelyn Hopkinson's article (Nixon Snags 28-21 Win Over Bears)

"After a career day at Detroit, Dontayvion Wicks saw limited action in the first half and did not return. LaFleur confirmed he and fellow receiver Matthew Golden are still dealing with their respective injuries."

0 points
0
0
Coldworld's picture

December 08, 2025 at 11:35 am

That sounds like a reaggravation. Presumably in game to me. He obviously couldn’t do what he did the week before.

0 points
0
0
murf7777's picture

December 08, 2025 at 02:33 pm

Reed came back just in time!

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

December 08, 2025 at 09:16 am

"This game played out a lot like the first game against the Bears last year-"

That's what I thought, too.
Hopefully the Packers can reverse the bad vibes of the second game from a year ago at Chicago in two weeks.

"I think Nazir Stackhouse is probably not as good as most fans think he is...Would Stackhouse have been able to do much on that last play, when Caleb Williams rolled out? Karl Brooks was in pursuit."

Stackhouse is a big guy, but he still gets pushed around. He's got to get stronger. I think this is why we've seen the Packers bring in two NT types in the last week. The Bears' OL is light LT-->C, but big RG-->RT. The right side of that line was eating against the Packers' front in the second half, especially in heavy sets.

" I felt bad for those edge players having to chase Caleb Williams around. One way or another, I hope they can contain him better next time. He is so fast and slippery."

Parsons is just playing too many snaps--he was an 80% guy in Dallas, but has been playing closer to 90% since about week 4. They've got to get him more breaks--whether that's by rotating deeper or pushing games out of reach by more efficient offensive play. That said, I think Williams will get beat up by Cleveland this week...that is, if Cleveland has any heart left.

0 points
0
0
Leatherhead's picture

December 08, 2025 at 11:26 am

Williams impressed me. Quite a few QBs would have been sacked with that kind of pressure.

Here's what Chicago was doing: They'd playfake run over the right side, to freeze Parsons. Meanwhile, Williams is rolling out, so now Parsons is chasing him towards the sideline, but Williams is fast and Parson can't cut him off or run him down. I thought it was a great way to try to attack Parsons

0 points
0
0
Coldworld's picture

December 08, 2025 at 04:17 pm

Williams does that every week. He’s not good at staying in the pocket and often inaccurate when he does. Running to his right he gets yards on the ground consistently and often makes his best passing plays. Hafley needs to adjust his backfield approach to cover this passes better. They all go down the side line. The DEs/ILBs though, did an excellent job of stoping Williams running for yards generally. 15 yards total I think.

0 points
0
0
WD's picture

December 08, 2025 at 07:00 am

If Caleb Williams would have decided to run on the final play i believe he would have scored and they would have easily ran in the 2 point conversion to win the game. Just saying.. I agree our defense was completely exhausted in the fourth . Our pass rushers were ineffective. That is what Caleb can do. I expect the same strategy will be used again the next Bear game, I think we really miss Van Ness more than we know. Not to mention Wyatt..

0 points
0
0
murf7777's picture

December 08, 2025 at 07:22 am

Not only might he not have scored, but I think it’s very debatable whether Caleb would’ve made the first down. We had four defenders (Egnabare, Cooper, Wllliams and Quay) closing in on him. That's a lot of speed coming at him. IMO, it would’ve been a collision around the first down marker. Our speed on defense made him rethink about running, so he hesitated and threw the ball too late to his WR which gave Nixon that 1/2 second to catch up and make a great INT. For a moment, the WR was wide open!

0 points
0
0
GregC's picture

December 08, 2025 at 07:34 am

Agreed. I've watched several replays, and I saw no path for Williams to the first down, not to mention the end zone. Edgerrin Cooper, Evan Williams, and Quay Walker were all in front of him, with Kingsley Enagbare not far behind.

0 points
0
0
Coldworld's picture

December 08, 2025 at 08:07 am

Live I thought he could have got the first down and out of bounds. In fact, on replay, I think he’d have been well short and in Bounds absent a miracle, even if the player by then running at him missed. The two behind were holding the down line.

0 points
0
0
Bitternotsour's picture

December 08, 2025 at 08:47 am

it was fourth down, in bounds or out. no way he was making the marker by running. Too much speed out there.

0 points
0
0
Coldworld's picture

December 08, 2025 at 09:01 am

Out of bounds would have mattered had he converted as I understand it (though I’m not entirely sure after trying to confirm that rule where the possession is continued). I agree, from replays, he wasn’t getting the first down, so it’s moot here anyway.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

December 08, 2025 at 09:19 am

I thought the same (first down, oob) in real time, but watching replays it seemed debatable. I didn't think there's any chance he scores on that run. Since he was running to throw, he wasn't going to find a cutback that I thought was there. Some are saying that if he held the ball just a bit longer that Moore would've uncovered for him underneath, but he didn't have that time.

0 points
0
0
Leatherhead's picture

December 08, 2025 at 04:31 pm

If he had just thrown that ball about two feet higher, it would have probably been a TD.

0 points
0
0
LambeauPlain's picture

December 08, 2025 at 01:22 pm

Next game need to get a two score game advantage in the first half or at least by the 4th quarter...and force Williams to have to pass.

Packers best quarters are the 2nd and 3rd...and they were again yesterday scoring 14 and 7 points respectively.

One score games in the 4th qtr with that bare OL is a dangerous way to play them in the final period.

0 points
0
0
barutanseijin's picture

December 08, 2025 at 02:58 pm

Debatable. If he tried and failed to score, but made the first down, he still would have lost a lot of time off the clock.

0 points
0
0
Packers0808's picture

December 08, 2025 at 08:09 am

I don't think Melton should ever have to buy himself a beer ever again Wisconsin! He did everything to stay on this team and it has paid off for him and us!

0 points
0
0
Bitternotsour's picture

December 08, 2025 at 08:50 am

He smothered the TD reception, he has the hands of an eligible tackle on a goal line play, but damn, he prevented an interception with one of the smartest pass interference penalties I can remember. I'd buy him a drink for sure.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

December 08, 2025 at 09:20 am

There was just enough air under the throw that the DB almost recovered on that TD pass, so there was a little bit of traffic. Still, body catch or not, I'll take it!

0 points
0
0
murf7777's picture

December 08, 2025 at 10:04 am

I was a little concerned about the amount of air on that throw and a few others from Love. Those passes are easier to catch, but I’d prefer to see less air on them—though that’s probably just nitpicking.

0 points
0
0
Coldworld's picture

December 08, 2025 at 11:42 am

Love said he under threw it. I see what Melton did as more about walling off the defender to catch it with his body between him and the ball. It allowed him to keep his balance and momentum at least parallel to the line. On rewatch it looks like a smart piece of play to me, not a body catch in the pejorative sense.

0 points
0
0
Packers0808's picture

December 08, 2025 at 12:01 pm

yup!

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

December 08, 2025 at 09:42 am

The total snaps (53-70) is worrying. That's a lot of wear and tear on the defense, and thankfully didn't result in injuries to any regulars. One point--Hobbs played and he looked decent in limited snaps. They're going to need him, yet.

Packers are just going to need to rotate deeper on their defensive front. I don't think that Wooden and Brooks are true 3-down DTs (which is how they're being used). I think they need to find an early-down IDL they can trust, especially before they see the Bears in two weeks. They're trying Brinson in that role right now and gave Riley some snaps.

I really like watching Evan Williams play. He was a steal.

Denver will be an interesting match-up. Their defense attacks the LOS and their CBs are good (if Surtain plays). Nix gets the ball out fast and doesn't take sacks. He just doesn't surrender negative plays...but he's not a chunk play QB, either. They run the ball, but don't churn like Detroit or Chicago. Basically, they'll be happy to shorten the game and make it about efficiency. It will be interesting to see how the Packers counter them.

0 points
0
0
Leatherhead's picture

December 08, 2025 at 11:15 am

Serious question. Is it possible to arrange for your opponent to have fewer offensive snaps? I mean, let's say instead of 70 snaps, we only play 55 defensive snaps. Doesn't that reduce some wear and tear?

It's not just the defensive front.....we have pretty close to zero depth in the secondary, and they're playing every snap.

So....I'd be looking at ways to keep my defense off the field more.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

December 08, 2025 at 01:08 pm

The fact that a team that runs as much as Chicago does got 70 snaps against a team that runs frequently (the Packers) is pretty noteworthy give the clock should be running a lot. I think the obvious answer you're looking for is to control clock and tempo with sustained drives that end in 7s.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

December 08, 2025 at 09:55 am

Talking about the run blocking, Denver is the #1 ranked rushing defense by yards/carry at 3.7/carry and the #2 ranked defense by yards rushing allowed. It is in Denver. Is this going to be Cleveland all over again? Remember Jacobs gaining 30 yards on 16 carries for a 1.9 yard average? 2.6 per carry as a team?

We shall see. Maybe Belton helps and Banks is back and seems to be playing more as advertised lately. I think Rhyan at center might be helpful depending on the matchup.

0 points
0
0
Leatherhead's picture

December 08, 2025 at 11:10 am

Denver is interesting. If we're going to lose one of our last 4, this would be the one you'd want it to be. Out of conference, on the road. Beating Chicago and Minnesota and Baltimore (at home) would be more important.

What I see/hear from Tauscher and Wahle and Bulaga, McCarren on YouTube is that Rhyan and Belton are knocking guys over. Against Detroit, Rhyan pushed Campbell, an above average LB, back 17 yards and deposited him on his tail. Belton is pushing guys around, especially when he's blocking towards the inside. Banks has been available for quite a while now, and I think we're finally getting to the point where we have the same group of guys practicing and playing together week after week, and it's showing.

0 points
0
0
Leatherhead's picture

December 08, 2025 at 11:02 am

Lots of meat here.

First, 53 offensive snaps doesn't fee like enough. You deduct for the incompletes, the sack, and the interception, and now you're getting down to only about 40 plays, and half of them are going to be 3 yard runs. On the other hand, they're scoring 28 points on those snaps, which is excellent.

Second, as BabeParilli might have said (and what I've been saying for a while), is that the Packers, by design, don't want to throw a bunch of passes, nor do they need to. We only threw 25 passes. We only completed 17 of them. I see that we sent the RB out into a pattern 19 times (in 25 throws) but only threw to him 3 times. They're decoys, and good ones. Still and all, the RB position is the engine of our offense, and they get the ball about half the time.

0 points
0
0
LambeauPlain's picture

December 08, 2025 at 01:43 pm

More red meat on the bone...the Packer O and Love are the best in the NFL on 3rd down. 5 of 5 third down plays had a chance to score...and 4 were TDs with Love throwing 3 scores.

Being efficient AND effective is very potent. I would not change the offensive focus too much on Sunday in Mile High keeping run & pass plays roughly equal.

LaFleur has always been an establish the run coach. Rodgers was able to pry him off that perch a few seasons, but now Love piling up the production with the determined run game.

0 points
0
0
NFLfan's picture

December 08, 2025 at 12:46 pm

The altitude (5280 feet) in Denver will have an impact. Arrive 1 day early to acclimate. Defense was gassed at sea level.

0 points
0
0
rhtsrebe's picture

December 08, 2025 at 03:51 pm

It seemed to me Caleb Williams rolled out to his right every time Parsons hard rushed from that side. Caleb slid out on the right and did a lot of damage. The one time he rolled out to left he threw an interception. It seemed he couldn't get has much torque throwing the ball running to his left has he was having running to his right. With that said, next time they play, it might be a good idea to blitz from Calebs right side to force him left. Put Parsons on the left side against the rookie offensive tackle and he doesn't have to hard rush. Force Williams into Parson vicinity instead of having parson's push him to the right and then chasing him. This way would force Caleb in the pocket or only to his left where he looked less comfortable. Calebs first td was a tougher throw and he was going to his right.. Just a thought.

I'm glad the Packers started adding beef at the DT position. It's been pretty obvious all year that we don't have any run stopper DT's. I wish there were some more experienced Vets out there then the practice squad guys but it is what it is... Hopefully, they can plug that whole, it's sizable.

0 points
0
0
CanPackFan's picture

December 08, 2025 at 06:20 pm

Good to see Riley getting some first snaps at DT. Allows us to keep the DTs mote fresh.

LBs looked great all game! Great speed from sideline to sideline with no runs over 10 yards! Excellent!

DBs looked OK except for Nixons earlier brain facts which he made up for at the end. I see Hobbs got 10 snaps but I don't remember his name being out even once?

STs? Not so good, but why do we always seem to have at least 1 + holding calls every game on kick off / punt returns? Other teams don't seem to have as many? Certainly looks like a coaching issue? Enough said.

0 points
0
0