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.
5 Pages<1234>»
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline Wade  
#11 Posted : Thursday, January 17, 2013 7:59:57 AM(UTC)
Wade

Rank: All Pro

Joined: 8/1/2009(UTC)
Location: nowhere of importance

Applause Given: 683
Applause Received: 715

Originally Posted by: DakotaT Go to Quoted Post
Your stats tell me that we are weak up the guts. The biggest problem with this team is that we lose the time of possession battle against good teams because our offensive line and running backs are subpar. Improve the running back position and run blocking - and the defense will automatically get better by being fresher. Oh, and improve the linebacking corp as well.


Weak up the guts. Yes. (IMO the only exception to this is Pickett, and he was hurt against SF.)

Agree that OL is subpar. Been saying this for years. Sitton is stud. Rest are just guys. (I know people like Bulaga, but IMO they've overrated him. He may be good enough with Sitton next to him, but not if Sitton has to cover for the guy on the other side as well.

What I would like to see is have Bulaga and Newhouse battle it out for RT, someone (and I don't mean a 7th rounder) to battle Dietrich Smith for center, and someone to battle Lang for LG (also not a 7th rounder), and someone to battle Sherrod for LT (and, yes, not a 7th rounder here as well). Bank on me to use the "OL OL OL" refrain more than once this offseason!

That said, I don't think the RBs are the problem. I think that Harris/Green/Grant/even Starks all have it in them to be "the guy" on a given Sunday. I would have no problem if the Packers "went with the hot hand" every week, did it by committee, or both. And, much as I think the OL as a whole is subpar, I think you can run regularly over Dietrich-Smith/Sitton. But as macbob and others have pointed out, the coaching staff must truly be committed to run as an option. And not just to running out of the shotgun formation.

It's bad enough when, because the run isn't working early, they abandon it too quick. But it made no sense at all for them to stop giving the rock to Harris in the SF game and run everything out of the option. Harris was running hard, running well, and getting extra yards when blocks weren't there. Why the heck the only "halftime adjustment" the Packers made was to adjust away from something that was working boggles the mind.

Getting away from problems surrounding running the ball, though, I don't think you can blame time of possession woes on the offense exclusively. At least not in the playoff failures. Because in both last year and this year's losses, the defense showed little ability to get off the field throughout the game. Sure, they were gassed by the end of the game, and McCarthy's play calling on offense and the offense's lack of execution contributed to the gassing. But the main reason they were gassed was they couldn't stop anything and couldn't get themselves off the field. If you let the other team's quarterback rip off 15-20 yard runs again and again, damn straight you're going to get tired. And you have no one to blame for that but yourself.

Each of the Packers' problems are magnified by the others. The running game suffers because the OL is not doing its job. The OL is exposed because Rodgers holds the ball too long AND because whoever calls the plays goes away from the run too easy, uses the shotgun too much, and forgets about the value of slants and other quick passes. Because the OL doesn't do its job, the vertical passing game suffers and Rodgers gets hit far too much. Because the vertical passing game suffers and Rodgers gets sacked so much, the offense spends too little time on the field. Because the offensive spends too little time on the field. Because the offense spends too little time on the field, the defense has even more trouble stopping the other team from scoring. And because the defense has more trouble stopping the other team from scoring, Mike McCarthy and company feel compelled to go away from the run and toward the shotgun and toward the deep passing game more, repeating the cycle of mediocrity all over again.

I'm a big believer that you should always play to your strengths more. But part of that means knowing what your weaknesses are, and not doing the things that give your weaknesses more power over the final outcome. I like McCarthy. But I also think the thing that keeps him from being a great coach -- as opposed to a good/very good one, is that he is sometimes blinded by our strengths (Rodgers and the receiving possibilities) that he puts the weaker parts of the team in positions where they are more likely to fail. He does it with the OL too often, he does it with the run game too often; and because he does it with the run game an the OL too often, he does it with the defense.

And the same is true with Capers. The weaknesses of the Packers defense are (save for Pickett) up the middle and in the linebacking corps, and to a lesser extent, its youth. Yet he too often emphasizes blitzing and coverage schemes that depend on above-average performance up the middle and from the LBs. And that require extra discipline from that youth.

And its even true a bit with Thompson. Where have Thompson's drafts been weakest? The OL. He has one unqualified success (Sitton). He has one semi-success (Bulaga). He has some where it is still too early to tell (Sherrod, Datko). But mostly he's been providing late round draft choices and tier three free agents; and even when he's drafted OL high, he's picked mostly late-round talent (e.g. Colledge, Spitz). Yet he stays with his same approach to talent acquisition (build through the draft and not overpay for others' free agents or our own) for the OL (where it hasn't worked) as well as for the other positions (WR, DB, QB) where it has.

The more I think about it, the more I think that the solution isn't in getting rid of this or that coach. Even if we eliminate Capers' part in "accenting our weaknesses," we still have the problems of McCarthy and Thompson doing the same. The solution for the Packers is much harder, because the Packers as an organization must find a way to recognize these tendencies in themselves and resist them. Capers must recognize more his weakness in trying to finesse too much. And McCarthy must recognize more his weakness in playcalling/gameplanning. Thompson must recognize more his weakness and the scouting department's in identifying OL talent. And recognizing their respective weaknesses more, all of them must take active steps in changing the way they make those particular decisions so that it's harder for them to succumb to them again.

It's tough. They don't want to stop doing what makes them well above average at what they do (e.g., Capers' willingness to try different combinations, McCarthy's passing mind, Thompson's ability to identify collegiate talent and those who identify collegiate talent). But they do need to recognize where those very talents tend to get them in more trouble rather than less.

But that's why they get paid the big bucks. Part of what coordinators and head coaches and general managers are being paid to do that their subordinates are not paid to do, is to minimize the effects of their own shortcomings. Any schmo can point out what their underlings are doing wrong. But the true leaders, the truly successful, are also able to assess themselves and figure out what they are doing wrong.

Greatness lies not in correcting others or in eliminating the weakness of others. Greatness lies in succeeding despite the errors of others AND in working around your own weaknesses.



And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
thanks Post received 3 applause.
yooperfan on 1/17/2013(UTC), Scythe on 1/17/2013(UTC), macbob on 1/17/2013(UTC)
Offline Porforis  
#12 Posted : Thursday, January 17, 2013 8:09:40 AM(UTC)
Porforis

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

United States
Joined: 8/22/2009(UTC)
Location: Milwaukee, WI

Applause Given: 169
Applause Received: 333

Originally Posted by: PackerTraxx Go to Quoted Post
I think you might have something here. But we sure could use an influx of some talent also. We are questionable at RB at best


I agree with everything else you have to say, but I sincerely believe that you could slap a James Starks behind a top 10 run blocking team and he'd be a top 10 back. Consider that we also have (had?) Cedrick Benson who showed a lot before he got hurt and DuJuan Harris who seems to be a VERY quick one-cut back that doesn't go down easy, I really can't say that we're that questionable at RB.
UserPostedImage
Offline wpr  
#13 Posted : Thursday, January 17, 2013 8:53:05 AM(UTC)
wpr

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2012PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2013FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2013

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

Applause Given: 3,143
Applause Received: 1,515

I think part of the problem with attitude is they think they are good enough to show up and they will win. Part of that is lack of real leadership. Part of it is youth. These kids were all so good in college and HS before that. They have to learn to give everything on every single play no matter who the opponent is.
UserPostedImage

"Will you follow me, one last time?" Thorin Oakenshield
Offline PackFanWithTwins  
#14 Posted : Thursday, January 17, 2013 10:45:38 AM(UTC)
PackFanWithTwins

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Joined: 9/26/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 13
Applause Received: 398

Originally Posted by: TheKanataThrilla Go to Quoted Post
Why is Capers always upstairs and not on the field? I think it would certainly help if the Defensive Coordinator actually had the ability to get in some of his guys faces and talk to them like men during the game.


He has always said that he likes being in the booth because he can see what is going no better. He probably has less distraction. He also doesn't seem to have the personality to get in someones face like that.

though his position assistants should really be the ones to get in the faces of their players.
The world needs ditch diggers to Danny!!!
UserPostedImage
Offline nerdmann  
#15 Posted : Thursday, January 17, 2013 12:01:52 PM(UTC)
nerdmann

Rank: Most Valuable Player

Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 2,704
Applause Received: 663

Originally Posted by: DakotaT Go to Quoted Post
Your stats tell me that we are weak up the guts. The biggest problem with this team is that we lose the time of possession battle against good teams because our offensive line and running backs are subpar. Improve the running back position and run blocking - and the defense will automatically get better by being fresher. Oh, and improve the linebacking corp as well.

Mike McCarthy doesn't want to drain time off the clock. He wants to score quickly, so that he can score more often.

Unfortunately this leaves us at a disadvantage when there are offensive players like Kaepernick you want to keep off the field.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
thanks Post received 1 applause.
macbob on 1/17/2013(UTC)
Offline wpr  
#16 Posted : Thursday, January 17, 2013 12:42:37 PM(UTC)
wpr

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2012PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2013FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2013

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

Applause Given: 3,143
Applause Received: 1,515

Originally Posted by: nerdmann Go to Quoted Post
MM doesn't want to drain time off the clock. He wants to score quickly, so that he can score more often.

Unfortunately this leaves us at a disadvantage when there are offensive players like Kaepernick you want to keep off the field.


I think if you polled 100 HCs from the NFL and NCAA and asked them if they preferred to score in 2-3 plays but only used up a min off the clock or have the ball for 10 minutes where you may or may not score and the score could be only a FG, 100% of the coaches would chose to score quickly.

But that is just my guess. Big Grin
UserPostedImage

"Will you follow me, one last time?" Thorin Oakenshield
Offline PackerTraxx  
#17 Posted : Thursday, January 17, 2013 2:51:46 PM(UTC)
PackerTraxx

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/13/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 18
Applause Received: 127

Originally Posted by: wpr Go to Quoted Post
I think if you polled 100 HCs from the NFL and NCAA and asked them if they preferred to score in 2-3 plays but only used up a min off the clock or have the ball for 10 minutes where you may or may not score and the score could be only a FG, 100% of the coaches would chose to score quickly.

But that is just my guess. Big Grin


I don't see that as a fair comparison, anybody would take a TD over a field goal, unless they can't count! The question should be "would you sooner take 2-3 plays or 10 minutes to score the same amount of points on a drive". Unless you're behind with a limited amount of time I believe 100% would opt for 10 minutes.
Why is Jerry Kramer not in the Hall of Fame?
Offline wpr  
#18 Posted : Thursday, January 17, 2013 2:55:35 PM(UTC)
wpr

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2012PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2013FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2013

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

Applause Given: 3,143
Applause Received: 1,515

Originally Posted by: PackerTraxx Go to Quoted Post
I don't see that as a fair comparison, anybody would take a TD over a field goal, unless they can't count! The question should be "would you sooner take 2-3 plays or 10 minutes to score the same amount of points on a drive". Unless you're behind with a limited amount of time I believe 100% would opt for 10 minutes.


It is fair because there is no guarantee you can score even if you have the ball for 10 minutes. Over the years we have seen many times were GB (and other teams) had the ball for 7-8 minutes and got shut out.

So the point is to take the points no matter how quick you get them. hanging on to the ball is no magic solution at all.
UserPostedImage

"Will you follow me, one last time?" Thorin Oakenshield
Offline Zero2Cool  
#19 Posted : Thursday, January 17, 2013 2:57:58 PM(UTC)
Zero2Cool

Rank: Legend

Yahoo! Fantasy Football - Gold: 2009FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Silver: 2010Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Silver: 2011ESPN NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2010Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2013

United States
Joined: 10/13/2006(UTC)
Location: Green Bay, WI

Applause Given: 1,966
Applause Received: 2,222

Originally Posted by: wpr Go to Quoted Post
I think if you polled 100 HCs from the NFL and NCAA and asked them if they preferred to score in 2-3 plays but only used up a min off the clock or have the ball for 10 minutes where you may or may not score and the score could be only a FG, 100% of the coaches would chose to score quickly.

But that is just my guess. Big Grin


If my team is up by 8 points and there is 12 minutes or less to go, I'll take the 10 minute drive that may or may not yield a field goal attempt. Especially if it's the Packers defense.
"I do not think there is any thrill that can go through the human heart like that felt by the inventor as he sees some creation of the brain unfolding to success... such emotions make a man forget food, sleep, friends, love, everything." - Nikola Tesla

UserPostedImage
thanks Post received 1 applause.
macbob on 1/17/2013(UTC)
Offline PackerTraxx  
#20 Posted : Thursday, January 17, 2013 3:11:42 PM(UTC)
PackerTraxx

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/13/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 18
Applause Received: 127

Originally Posted by: wpr Go to Quoted Post
It is fair because there is no guarantee you can score even if you have the ball for 10 minutes. Over the years we have seen many times were GB (and other teams) had the ball for 7-8 minutes and got shut out.

So the point is to take the points no matter how quick you get them. hanging on to the ball is no magic solution at all.


I've also seen GB go 3 and out... I'll take the points not matter how long it takes.
Why is Jerry Kramer not in the Hall of Fame?
Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest (3)
5 Pages<1234>»
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

Tweeter

Recent Topics
1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

10h / Green Bay Packers Talk / RaiderPride

10h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

16h / Green Bay Packers Talk / macbob

16h / Green Bay Packers Talk / macbob

21-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

21-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

20-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / Since69

20-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / TheKanataThrilla

20-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / sschind

19-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

19-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

19-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / sschind

18-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / luigis