Welcome Guest! You can login or register.
Login or Register.
#1
Posted
:
Tuesday, November 20, 2012 3:05:33 PM(UTC)
Joined: 3/16/2007(UTC)
Location: North Central Wisconsin
Applause Given: 439
Applause Received: 1,241
I went looking for the sack % numbers and started to compile some different numbers for reference, a couple things surprised me a bit.
1. I knew the Packers were giving up more sacks the the average, but 9 over the average mildly shocked me. Only three teams give up a worse sack percentage.. two being teams in the NFC playoff chase. That is a concern, but I would like to see how the run attempts, when we became more balanced, have improved that over the course of the season.
2. I expected our yards per carry to be much more off the NFL average than the 3.77 to the league average of 4.21.
3. I expected our completion percentage to be greater than 5.41% over average, but then considering the sack numbers, it is just as if not more impressive than I expected. That is one of the best cases for how special Rodgers and this passing game really is.
4. I love our play mix at the moment, just about 60/40 in pass ratio.
File Attachment(s):
NFL Offensive Stats Through Week 11.pdf
(47kb) downloaded 8 time(s).You cannot view/download attachments. Try to login or register.
#2
Posted
:
Wednesday, November 21, 2012 10:42:50 PM(UTC)
Joined: 8/7/2008(UTC)
Location: San Francisco
Applause Given: 778
Applause Received: 495
I hate Niner fans. (That has nothing to do with your analysis, but just wanted to say that).
1) Uncle
's #1 off-season priority needs to be OL. That % needs to be around 6.
2) 3.77 is inflated by
and Cobb. Our RBs are probably closer to 3.4 or 3.3.
3) Would be higher if our receivers didn't have the dropsies.
4) 60/40 is about right.
#3
Posted
:
Wednesday, November 21, 2012 11:47:08 PM(UTC)
Joined: 9/17/2012(UTC)
Applause Given: 146
Applause Received: 187
zombieslayer said: 
I hate Niner fans. (That has nothing to do with your analysis, but just wanted to say that).
1) Uncle
's #1 off-season priority needs to be OL. That % needs to be around 6.
2)
3.77 is inflated by and Cobb. Our RBs are probably closer to 3.4 or 3.3.3) Would be higher if our receivers didn't have the dropsies.
4) 60/40 is about right.
They should be a factor. At least Cobb should anyways.. He took snaps at RB and gained almost a 100 yards thus far. I'd use the 3.77 as a basis. Who cares if it's the RB or
it's still running the ball.
#4
Posted
:
Thursday, November 22, 2012 9:50:28 AM(UTC)
Joined: 8/7/2008(UTC)
Location: San Francisco
Applause Given: 778
Applause Received: 495
Gaycandybacon said: They should be a factor. At least Cobb should anyways.. He took snaps at RB and gained almost a 100 yards thus far. I'd use the 3.77 as a basis. Who cares if it's the RB or
it's still running the ball.
I was just arguing semantics with Pack93z. You're right, it really doesn't matter though.
#5
Posted
:
Thursday, November 22, 2012 9:55:51 AM(UTC)
Joined: 8/9/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 1
Applause Received: 30
Id like to see how many sacks are from holding the ball though.
#6
Posted
:
Thursday, November 22, 2012 3:13:47 PM(UTC)
Joined: 10/13/2006(UTC)
Location: Green Bay, WI
Applause Given: 2,604
Applause Received: 4,337
When drafting players, a great deal of them are projects waiting to be coached up. Therefore, I think its time to quit pining for drafting more OL as that's been done. Rather, the demands need to be on a new OL coaching staff.
#7
Posted
:
Thursday, November 22, 2012 3:22:10 PM(UTC)
Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 4,337
Applause Received: 2,221
Rios39 said: Id like to see how many sacks are from holding the ball though.
it has to be about 25%
#8
Posted
:
Thursday, November 22, 2012 4:22:22 PM(UTC)
Joined: 2/9/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 1
Applause Received: 2
#9
Posted
:
Thursday, November 22, 2012 5:31:57 PM(UTC)
Joined: 8/18/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 1,069
Applause Received: 2,136
Zero2Cool said: When drafting players, a great deal of them are projects waiting to be coached up. Therefore, I think its time to quit pining for drafting more OL as that's been done. Rather, the demands need to be on a new OL coaching staff.
You really can say something intelligent once in a while, can't you?
Users browsing this topic
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.