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.
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline play2win  
#1 Posted : Thursday, January 31, 2013 7:26:19 AM(UTC)
play2win

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

United States
Joined: 3/29/2012(UTC)
Location: Milwaukee

Applause Given: 1,076
Applause Received: 725

Just reading Mike Vandermause chat at GBPG, and his sentiments seem to lie along the same lines as the talking points we often hear from Mike McCarthy: "This is a passing league, and with Aaron Rodgers at the controls, you want the ball in his hands."

"Finley would be my top priority. With the loss of Greg Jennings, they still need playmakers, and Finley is one. Or at worst, he opens up the field for others to shine. I know that sounds like an expensive decoy, but his presence makes that offense better."

" Look at 2010, when they won a Super Bowl title with James Starks as their primary ball carrier. That's proof you don't need a top-flight back to win it all."
http://www.greenbaypress...t-will-Thompson-do-next-

I look around at the where the NFL currently sits, and most importantly, the power in the NFL, and it doesn't seem to point to PASSING. Two of the top 11 RUSHING teams are in the Super Bowl. None of the top 11 passing teams are. Not one of them. BAL is #15. SF is #23. I think that is significant.

While balance appears to be important, it seems to me teams need a rushing heavy game plan to win it all in today's NFL. Frank Gore. Ray Rice. Neither are slouches, but they are not the best in the league.

This company line we've been force fed over the years just doesn't seem to wash with me. Finley is big, but he is not the biggest TE in the NFL, or nothing extraordinary. Finley can be fast, but he certainly is not after the catch. He can't block worth a lick. And Vandermause suggests we can't live without him and should fork over $10M? Really? If he makes everybody so much better, then why is it our team didn't really take off in 2010 until after he went to IR with injury? Does anyone remember the BS flying around prior to his injury, between he and Jennings getting their touches?

I want to see this mentality in Green Bay change. Our skill players at QB and WR are some of the league's best. All we need to do is become more balanced on offense, by running the football more, and with authority. I'd love to see our team become more dedicated to road grading over our opponents with a well practiced/coached, well executed, and confidently called running attack.

It will open EVERYTHING else up, and make winning it all more attainable.
Offline wpr  
#2 Posted : Thursday, January 31, 2013 8:43:09 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: 3,049
Applause Received: 1,481

well it makes sense that when teams load up to pass that the defense will load up to stop it. The offense then has to counter with a strong running game which then will be countered with a stronger run defense. It is a matter of move and counter moves.
More than a question of are they pass or running teams SF and Baltimore are teams that execute and don't make mistakes on offense or defense and that is what wins games. They are both 8th in Turnovers.
UserPostedImage

Will you follow me, one last time?
Offline earthquake  
#3 Posted : Thursday, January 31, 2013 8:54:37 AM(UTC)
earthquake

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/11/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 187
Applause Received: 61

While I do agree that more balance would be good, one year does not make a trend, lets look at yards thrown by the previous few winning SP QBS:
Eli manning: 4933 - also Tom Brady 5,235
Aaron Rodgers: 4643
Drew Brees: 4,388
blank
Offline Pack93z  
#4 Posted : Thursday, January 31, 2013 9:29:47 AM(UTC)
Pack93z

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Bronze: 2012

United States
Joined: 3/16/2007(UTC)
Location: North Central Wisconsin

Applause Given: 398
Applause Received: 1,077

No it is not a running league.

It is a balance league, over the course of a season and playoffs, teams are going to present options that try and take away one aspect while giving another up. As a team, you have to have the balance to counter punch what they "give up" to force them to play honest and then you can play to your strengths. About once a decade there is a defense that is so dominate that they can smother an offense, but the currently landscape of the NFL, I don't think that defense is out there. 85 Bears, 01 Ravens come to mind.

Example. 49ers post season.

Against us they ran because we tried to take away the middle of the line and played coverage behind it. They exploited our weak edges and ran it down our throats. Atlanta, took away the edges and the Niners exploited the secondary. They are balanced enough (even with Smith at QB) to attack what you give them.. in other words, they can play multiple different ways to beat you.

My opinion, is that we by default are pass happy and try to force our will through the passing game no matter what the defense presents us. In 2011 we were dominate enough to do that most games until someone through pass rush and coverage took it away and we were beaten because we could counter that. This year, we tried to be more balanced, but we still we reluctant to beat teams on the ground, late in the season we could run, I think we should have ran more and help bolster our defense, shorten the game and rely on Rodgers late to win it.

My hope is that we follow the age old saying, pass it to score points, run it to win games. Basically build up the score and be able to run it effectively after that to win the game and rip the oppositions hearts out.

The league is constantly in motion, we call things like the read option revolutionary, but honestly, it is just another variation of days gone past. Zone blocking and man blocking come in and out of "style". 3-4 and 4-3 go back and forth as the dominate defenses.. it is curricular in nature. Teams that win consistently are able to play balanced offense, the can run the ball and set the tone and couple that with a fresher defense that generally ranks high because their offenses control the clock.

The recipe has been around for decades. It isn't the only way to win, but IMO, it is the most consistent and effective way to win.
I think when there's enough will and aggression, there's no shortage of talent either.

UserPostedImage
thanks Post received 3 applause.
yooperfan on 1/31/2013(UTC), QCHuskerFan on 1/31/2013(UTC), macbob on 1/31/2013(UTC)
Offline doddpower  
#5 Posted : Thursday, January 31, 2013 11:37:59 AM(UTC)
DoddPower

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Gold: 2011

United States
Joined: 9/24/2007(UTC)
Location: Visalia, CA

Applause Given: 2,051
Applause Received: 514

I think it has everything to do with the the defenses of the two teams this year, mixed with a balanced offense. Defense wins Championships. That's something I've always believed. Baltimore has been banged up this year, but they have been getting healthy recently and play very good defense most of the time. It's obvious the 49'ers have a great defense. Over half of their defensive starters are in the pro-bowl.

thanks Post received 1 applause.
play2win on 1/31/2013(UTC)
Offline porky88  
#6 Posted : Thursday, January 31, 2013 8:46:17 PM(UTC)
porky88

Rank: Pro Bowl

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Gold: 2012Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Silver: 2013Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Silver: 2014

Joined: 4/26/2007(UTC)

Applause Given: 193
Applause Received: 398

Both Joe Flacco and Colin Kaepernick are playing at a very high-level. Flacco has 8 TDs to 0 INTs in the postseason. We saw firsthand what Kaepernick did. The trend seems to lend credence to the level of quarterback play. If your quarterback gets hot, then you have a chance to win the Super Bowl.

In other words, it's a quarterback league. Kurt Warner, Drew Brees, Aaron Rodgers, and Eli Manning are the last four quarterbacks from the NFC. Neither player had much of a dominant running game.

The AFC quarterbacks from the same span are Ben Roethlisberger, Peyton Manning, and Tom Brady. I think the same philosophy applies, though Roethlisberger had an amazing defense in ‘08. He also had a very, very good one in ‘10.

Is this year another shift in the ever evolving NFL or is it the rise of two young quarterbacks into the next class?

My guess is the latter, though the Packers place a larger burden on Rodgers than most teams do their respective quarterback. They'd be wise to take some stress off him, and tweaking the running game isn’t a bad place to start.
thanks Post received 2 applause.
play2win on 2/1/2013(UTC), Packers_Finland on 2/2/2013(UTC)
Offline porky88  
#7 Posted : Thursday, January 31, 2013 8:47:08 PM(UTC)
porky88

Rank: Pro Bowl

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Gold: 2012Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Silver: 2013Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Silver: 2014

Joined: 4/26/2007(UTC)

Applause Given: 193
Applause Received: 398

EDIT
Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest
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
20m / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / QCHuskerFan

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Wade

8h / Announcements / Zero2Cool

30-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

30-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

30-Oct / Announcements / Zero2Cool

30-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

30-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

29-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

29-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

29-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / sschind