Green Bay Packers Forum

Join Our Green Bay Packers Interactive Community!

We have been providing fans with the best source of Packers information since 2006!
Your participation is greatly anticipated!
Login or Register.
2 Pages12>
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline blueleopard  
#1 Posted : Tuesday, December 9, 2008 8:19:38 PM(UTC)
blueleopard

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/22/2008(UTC)

Applause Received: 73

We are one of seven NFL teams who emphasize zone blocking in our running scheme. The other teams are...

Denver Broncos -- 16TH IN NFL (1470, 4.5 ypc)
Atlanta Falcons -- 2ND IN NFL (1907 total yards, 4.2 ypc)
Tampa Bay Buccaneers -- 13TH IN NFL (1502 total yards, 4 ypc)
Oakland Raiders -- 10TH IN NFL (1540 total yards, 4.2 ypc)
Houston Texans -- 11TH IN NFL (1522, 4.4 ypc)
Carolina Panthers -- 4TH IN NFL (1898 total yards, 4.8 ypc)
Green Bay Packers -- 18TH IN NFL (1445 total yards, 4.1 ypc)

Atlanta has a rookie QB, Michael Turner, and Jerious Norwood.
Tampa Bay has Earnest Graham and Cadillac Williams.
I live in the Bay Area, and I don't even know who the Raiders start at tailback.
Houston has Steve Slaton.
Carolina has that tandem of Jonathan Stewart and DeAngelo Williams.
<b>We have Ryan Grant.</b>

If you look at their cast of players, they really aren't that great (except for obviously Carolina.) But the thing is, Carolina is under their first year in the ZBS.

If we're going to keep the scheme, we need to totally retool the offensive line and probably hire a new coach, because it's not giving us the results we're supposed to be getting--even with the continuity we've been having.
Danreb Victorio A Believer of Greg Jennings
Sponsor
Offline shield4life  
#2 Posted : Tuesday, December 9, 2008 10:36:15 PM(UTC)
shield4life

Rank: 3rd Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/7/2008(UTC)
Location: Montreal

Applause Given: 3
Applause Received: 24

Why did we even turn to a zbs? What's the advantage?
Glad To Be A Packers Fan.
Offline Greg C.  
#3 Posted : Wednesday, December 10, 2008 2:02:17 AM(UTC)
Greg C.

Rank: Pro Bowl

Joined: 8/9/2008(UTC)
Location: Marquette, Michigan

Applause Received: 48

I still think that the offense never recovered from the loss of OC Jeff Jagodzinski after one season. He was supposed to be our ZBS guru.
blank
Offline Cheesey  
#4 Posted : Wednesday, December 10, 2008 2:13:29 AM(UTC)
Cheesey

Rank: Most Valuable Player

Joined: 7/28/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 229
Applause Received: 456

ZB....it hasn't worked here yet.
Get rid of it.......it's costing us way too much it seems.
JMO
UserPostedImage
Offline HoustonMatt  
#5 Posted : Wednesday, December 10, 2008 3:05:23 AM(UTC)
HoustonMatt

Rank: 6th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 9/1/2008(UTC)


Everyone is welcome to their own opinion of the ZBS, and if you're against it, that's fine, but you can't use those statistics to support your position.

Those stats show that all 7 teams using the ZBS rank among the top 18 rushing offenses. And if you dig just a tad deeper you'll find that we are 15th in YPC and only 30 yards behind 15th in total yards.

That means we are almost exactly league average.

Those stats provide eveidence supporting the ZBS rather than indicting it.
blank
Offline blueleopard  
#6 Posted : Wednesday, December 10, 2008 4:05:06 AM(UTC)
blueleopard

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/22/2008(UTC)

Applause Received: 73

This post was made with the intention of making known where we're at, compared with other teams who use it. It is not to show my opinion at all.

The bottom line is that this is our fourth year under the system, and we're the worst at using it, despite the fact that our offensive line has remained the same since it was installed.

That can mean one of two things:
- Our offensive line isn't good enough.
- Our offensive line coach isn't good enough.

As far as I know, it can also mean both. We thought the strength was in pass blocking, because of elusive Favre continued to be, but this year the offensive line is so bad, we can easily predict when Rodgers would get sacked. (Yeah, I know Favre's experience and competitive nature is a factor to him not being sacked, but that doesn't affect Rodgers own athleticism and grasp of the system.)
Danreb Victorio A Believer of Greg Jennings
Offline brnt247  
#7 Posted : Wednesday, December 10, 2008 4:16:38 AM(UTC)
brnt247

Rank: Fresh Cheesehead

Joined: 8/11/2008(UTC)


Grant is averaging 4 yards a carry, the same as Matt Forte but we seem to think that we aren't able to run the ball. We've been pretty effective running the ball since the Indy game, it definitely isn't a problem that needs fixing.
blank
Offline Rockmolder  
#8 Posted : Wednesday, December 10, 2008 7:03:29 AM(UTC)
Rockmolder

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2010

Netherlands
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 167
Applause Received: 272

Especially Denver's rank is pretty amazing, looking at how many RBs they lost this year. This scheme has been great for them for ages.

Maybe it is indeed more of a coaches problem, maybe our O-lineman are bad. We're right in the middle of the pack though, with a less than stellar interior defensive line. If you look at some of the names, two of them are just ok players at best (Guards), two players that are declining ath their age (Tackles) and just one guy that seems to be working out like he should in Wells.
UserPostedImage
Offline gakko  
#9 Posted : Wednesday, December 10, 2008 7:16:23 AM(UTC)
gakko

Rank: Practice Squad

Joined: 1/17/2007(UTC)

Applause Given: 1
Applause Received: 1

Our problem is, we don't have a guy with extensive knowledge of the scheme to make it work.
blank
Offline brnt247  
#10 Posted : Wednesday, December 10, 2008 3:11:22 PM(UTC)
brnt247

Rank: Fresh Cheesehead

Joined: 8/11/2008(UTC)


How isn't it working? I don't quite get it. Grant is averaging 4.0 yards a carry, and since the Indy game he's been averaging 4.4. Just because he isn't as effective as he was last season doesn't mean he isn't producing. People just saw the beginning of the season and are holding pat to their opinion that Grant isn't very good. He's a very solid runner and is 10th in the league in rushing right now and has the same YPC as Marion Barber. Jackson is averaging 5.5 yards a carry. The ZBS obviously isn't having any negative impact on our team. We're a pass first team, thats just how McCarthy coaches.
blank
Offline Packers_Finland  
#11 Posted : Wednesday, December 10, 2008 3:33:57 PM(UTC)
Packers_Finland

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/11/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 88
Applause Received: 45

Ryan Grant has been in the top 10 RBs after the Indy game. Before that he played weak, I guess you can blame that on the injured hammy. He didn't have a bad game last week.
This is a placeholder
Offline DanJustDan29  
#12 Posted : Wednesday, December 10, 2008 3:52:44 PM(UTC)
DanJustDan29

Rank: 6th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 10/12/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 3
Applause Received: 7

Ryan Grant is the type of RB we need. Being able to involve him and Bjack in a two back system would be great. I really think that if Jennings does leave during Free Agency Grant and Jackson will be VERY important to our success next year.
Teamwork is what the Green Bay Packers were all about. They didn't do it for individual glory. They did it because they loved one another. -Vince Lombardi
Offline warhawk  
#13 Posted : Wednesday, December 10, 2008 4:02:53 PM(UTC)
warhawk

Rank: 3rd Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/7/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 1
Applause Received: 230

I believe what is missing in the discussion here is that we emphasize the pass more than these other teams which we should. We are more talented than these teams in the passing game.

What I see as a possible rub on the ZBS is the reason these teams are successful with it is because running the ball is their primary offense and the pass is second.

In our case we are fortunate to have an efficient QB and deep talent at receiver and it would be dumb to try and force feed the running game as the primary attack and not look to the Greg Jennings' and Donald Drivers to score points for us.

I would say the fact we may not produce the numbers others do is that we don't have an "all in" mentality to beat teams with the running game and it may just take that to produce the numbers others have.

Personally, the way this team is built I would rather have a run game that compliments a primarily passing offense. Our OL is better at pass protection and our best skill players are the receivers.
"The train is leaving the station."
Online dfosterf  
#14 Posted : Wednesday, December 10, 2008 4:20:14 PM(UTC)
dfosterf

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

United States
Joined: 8/19/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 213
Applause Received: 437

I'm still quite convinced that the ZBS has been a wholesale failure in Green Bay. Mike McCarthy has repeatedly stated in press conferences that it is one of the tools in the arsenal, but that we are not a ZBS offense, per se. My biggest problem with the ZBS as it relates to Green Bay is in the personnel decisions that went hand in hand with the concept. We have built an offensive line that is suited for the ZBS through the draft. If you read draft scout analaysts, you will often find phrases like, "Best suited for a ZBS, he's on the lighter side, but is quick and finds his proper pad level and footwork, yada, yada, yada. That's what we keep getting, and developmental player is the norm. Why? Because they lack size, imo.
The loss of the ZBS coach, Jeff Jagowhatever, I think, factored in to the failure, for sure.

I also do not like one of the tenets of the ZBS, that is, the low-cut block. As you might recall, this is a block we do not practice due to the potential for injury to one of our own defenders in practice. I know it's legal, but that don't make it classy, jmo. Plus, if we ARE doing it, well, I'd just have to say FAIL, yet again, because I don't see Jarred Allen, for example, coming off the field after having been cut block by anyone on the Pack...(This is semi-jest, I think)

I sincerely wish for a complete abandonment of this scheme in one extremely important aspect... STOP drafting offensive linemen suited mostly for it... if you see in a draft report that "this guy is suited for the ZBS, yada yada yada... that spells FAIL. Cliffy and Tausch were never ZBSers...most of the rest are. I say get those linemen BIG and early, if through the draft... we'll figure out the schemes once we have the pure, raw talent and size. The ZBS CAN be run with big men, they just need to be able to MOVE...this equates to a combination found in the very early going in a draft, or through FA... not through mid-to-late rounds with semi-large men.

As to the coaching, it IS possible that they are doing a pretty good job with the talent given them. We don't have a ZBS guy, as has been pointed out. What we have is non-ZBS coaching with some ZBS football players, at least in the type of player that they are. I think a couple of 330 lb. linemen would do wonders for the perception of the coaching, again, jmo.
UserPostedImage
damn skippy I'm an owner. I currently own a full .00001924537805515393 % of the Green Bay Packers.



Offline MassPackersFan  
#15 Posted : Wednesday, December 10, 2008 4:56:44 PM(UTC)
MassPackersFan

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Joined: 9/16/2007(UTC)

Applause Given: 1
Applause Received: 7

Easier said than done, when talking about "elite" guards.

Number of OG's taken in the 1st round:

2008: 0
2007: 1
2006: 1
2005: 1
2004: 0

Compare that to tackles:

2008: 7
2007: 3
2006: 1
2005: 2
2004: 3

And last year we did draft a more mauler type guard at 317lbs, who could easily put on weight to get up to 325 after a year in the NFL.
UserPostedImage
Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages12>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Notification

Icon
Error


Recent Topics
2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / GermanGilbert

11h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Wizard3461

19-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / RaiderPride

19-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

19-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / porky88

19-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / nyrpack

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / PackFanWithTwins

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / musccy

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Dulak

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / luigis

17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool


Tweeter