Green Bay Packers Forum

Welcome to your Green Bay Packers Online Community!

Since 2006, PackersHome has been providing a unique experience for fans.
Your participation is greatly anticipated!
Login or Register.
7 Pages«<4567>
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline nerdmann  
#76 Posted : Wednesday, June 19, 2013 10:01:09 PM(UTC)

Rank: Select Member
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 3,611
Applause Received: 882
Are there still people who deny Mike and Aaron abandon the run?
thanks Post received 1 applause.
DoddPower on 6/20/2013(UTC)
Offline play2win  
#77 Posted : Thursday, June 20, 2013 5:20:37 AM(UTC)

Rank: Registered
United States
Joined: 3/29/2012(UTC)
Location: Milwaukee
Applause Given: 1,076
Applause Received: 724
Dexter_Sinister said: Go to Quoted Post
Cart before the horse.

Running the ball consistently without the ability to run effectively is going to put them in 3rd and long. It is going to come up short when you need to rely on it. 3rd & short, goal line and protecting a 4th quarter lead.

What I am looking for is the ability to run the ball effectively.


Cart before the horse? BS. The Packers have had the talent IMO. It simply had not been used correctly.

If your HC is OK with pass:run ratios of 8:1, your OL will never be able to wear out an opponent to effectively run block. Run blocking is all about precision and power, knocking your opponent backwards off his mark. Good run blocking is simply the result of going to this well again and again. That is what makes good running teams.

"Effective" isn't just "oh, good, this is working. Now lets use it." I don't buy any of this stuff about us not being able to run last season. Too often, we simply chose not to, especially during our first 5 games, taking us to a 2-3 record.

Lets put it this way: our own OL complained publicly after our loss to IND. Were those complaints about their position coach, Campen? Their supposedly shitty RBs? No, they were about the play calling that chose pass over run, again and again and again, resulting in a really fucking stupid loss. Should have never happened. Same with the SEA game.

Mike McCarthy simply allowed himself to get away from fundamental football. Really simple. This isn't rocket science.

Odd too, that after the public outcry for more running plays, we ran more, not particularly "effectively", and won more.

I do think we are both wanting the same things dexter, and I think we will see it realized this season.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
DoddPower on 6/20/2013(UTC)
Offline DarkaneRules  
#78 Posted : Thursday, June 20, 2013 9:15:20 AM(UTC)

Rank: Senior Member
Joined: 8/15/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 250
Applause Received: 411
I am more in the line with the camp of people that say with teams like this that your best defense is offense. The gameplan is a risk if it doesn't work, but I believe the best plan is to shorten the game with long clock killing drives. The more time teams like the 49ers are on the field with that QB, the more they will hurt you. Once Kap gets into rhythm, I don't believe you can stop him. To me he is one of the most exciting players in the NFL.
Offline nerdmann  
#79 Posted : Thursday, June 20, 2013 9:31:41 AM(UTC)

Rank: Select Member
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 3,611
Applause Received: 882
Suddenly everyone's on my side!

Shit's starting to warm my cockles.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
DarkaneRules on 6/23/2013(UTC)
Offline Dexter_Sinister  
#80 Posted : Thursday, June 20, 2013 5:56:30 PM(UTC)

Rank: Registered
Joined: 6/12/2010(UTC)
Applause Given: 292
Applause Received: 266
play2win said: Go to Quoted Post
Cart before the horse? BS. The Packers have had the talent IMO. It simply had not been used correctly.

If your HC is OK with pass:run ratios of 8:1, your OL will never be able to wear out an opponent to effectively run block. Run blocking is all about precision and power, knocking your opponent backwards off his mark. Good run blocking is simply the result of going to this well again and again. That is what makes good running teams.

"Effective" isn't just "oh, good, this is working. Now lets use it." I don't buy any of this stuff about us not being able to run last season. Too often, we simply chose not to, especially during our first 5 games, taking us to a 2-3 record.

Lets put it this way: our own OL complained publicly after our loss to IND. Were those complaints about their position coach, Campen? Their supposedly shitty RBs? No, they were about the play calling that chose pass over run, again and again and again, resulting in a really fucking stupid loss. Should have never happened. Same with the SEA game.

Mike McCarthy simply allowed himself to get away from fundamental football. Really simple. This isn't rocket science.

Odd too, that after the public outcry for more running plays, we ran more, not particularly "effectively", and won more.

I do think we are both wanting the same things dexter, and I think we will see it realized this season.


What was the pass run ratio last year?

Coincidentally, Benson also sucked as a runner and always has. He was all they had in the first 5 games.

So who was the RB that wasn't "Supposedly shitty"? Who had a good YPC average in the first 5 games. Green playing on a bad leg, Saine on IR or Starks on PUP?

Because if they were not really shitty and it was the lack of attempts, they should have had a decent YPC and not many carries.

In the Colts game, the Packers had their 3rd highest rushing total of the year.

The D giving up 30 is much more to blame than the lack of a run game.

Dropping picks was one of the issues I would identify as the biggest reason we lost. Not the run game.
Offline nerdmann  
#81 Posted : Thursday, June 20, 2013 8:51:01 PM(UTC)

Rank: Select Member
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 3,611
Applause Received: 882
Dexter_Sinister said: Go to Quoted Post
What was the pass run ratio last year?

Coincidentally, Benson also sucked as a runner and always has. He was all they had in the first 5 games.

So who was the RB that wasn't "Supposedly shitty"? Who had a good YPC average in the first 5 games. Green playing on a bad leg, Saine on IR or Starks on PUP?

Because if they were not really shitty and it was the lack of attempts, they should have had a decent YPC and not many carries.

In the Colts game, the Packers had their 3rd highest rushing total of the year.

The D giving up 30 is much more to blame than the lack of a run game.

Dropping picks was one of the issues I would identify as the biggest reason we lost. Not the run game.


I thought Benson looked good last year. Always made the right cut and got what was there.

We went up against some tough defensive fronts, though. And of course, occasionally abandoned the run entirely.
Offline play2win  
#82 Posted : Friday, June 21, 2013 6:27:03 AM(UTC)

Rank: Registered
United States
Joined: 3/29/2012(UTC)
Location: Milwaukee
Applause Given: 1,076
Applause Received: 724
Dexter_Sinister said: Go to Quoted Post
What was the pass run ratio last year?

Coincidentally, Benson also sucked as a runner and always has. He was all they had in the first 5 games.

So who was the RB that wasn't "Supposedly shitty"? Who had a good YPC average in the first 5 games. Green playing on a bad leg, Saine on IR or Starks on PUP?

Because if they were not really shitty and it was the lack of attempts, they should have had a decent YPC and not many carries.

In the Colts game, the Packers had their 3rd highest rushing total of the year.

The D giving up 30 is much more to blame than the lack of a run game.

Dropping picks was one of the issues I would identify as the biggest reason we lost. Not the run game.


Did Benson suck against CHI when he rushed 20 times for 81 yds and a 4.1 ypc average? Did Benson suck against NO when he rushed 18 times for 87 yds and a 4.7 ypc average?

Maybe you are forgetting how we wound up 21-3 early in the 2nd Q v. IND. it was a balanced attack of run/pass, one that McCarhty went away from, allowing IND back into the game, serving us a 27-30 loss.

BTW, here is how we started the 3rd Q, up 21-3: pass, pass, pass, pass, INT. pass, pass, pass, PUNT. The 4th Q was sickeningly over pass happy. Benson wasn't our only rusher either. Alex Green was averaging 6.1 ypc in that game...

There is a way to run, and a way not to run. Benson had all 9 carries by our RBs for the entire freaking game v. SF. Benson had 2 of our 3 first half carries v. SEA, while Aaron Rodgers was sacked 8 times in that same half. Game over. Should have been anyway. Dumbest real time game management I may have ever seen.

We should have won that game hands down, but we severely mismanaged the run game the entire first half while Rodgers was getting killed. What the F did McCarthy not see? I mean, in that first half? In the moment, when he should have total control of the game and his team's plays? That blew my mind. After he gets into the locker room, he realizes his folly, and gives Benson 10 carries in the 3rd Q. We owned that Q, yet only came away with a pair of FGs. Had he handed Benson the rock through all 4 Quarters like he did in the 3rd, we would have won. Guaranteed.

Maybe I exaggerated with the ratio for those first 5 games, but if you look at when it mattered most, maybe not, especially in our losses, which is what we are talking about.

You are revising history to fit your argument. Benson was good prior to his injury, and he was not used properly in our 3 losses.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
nerdmann on 6/21/2013(UTC)
Offline Dexter_Sinister  
#83 Posted : Friday, June 21, 2013 12:27:31 PM(UTC)

Rank: Registered
Joined: 6/12/2010(UTC)
Applause Given: 292
Applause Received: 266
Who else were we suppose to give the ball too beside Benson in the SF game?

Starks was out, Saine was out, Green wasn't ready. NOBODY else was on the roster. They stopped running because Benson was getting 2 per.

Benson ended the season just under his career average. Benson sucked last year like he always had. He had a decent, but not great game against Chicago with some extra personal motivation.

The Saints had a horrible run D. The were 32nd in YPC allowed. They averaged giving up 5.2 per. So Benson getting 4.7 per is BELOW AVERAGE. Because he sucks.

Benson had a 2.9 in the Colts game, a 2 in the SF game and a 2.7 in the Seattle game. Because he sucks

Since Benson has always done that. He has a 3.8 career, 3.8 in Cincy and a 3.8 in Chicago. So I wasn't surprised he had a 3.5 for us. I actually expected it

Regardless of how he looks, he didn't produce like Grant (who nobody likes in spite of having the same YPC as Emmitt Smith.)

In the Seattle game McCarthey was probably thinking in that since we only have Benson and he sucks, we should try and supplement the running game with a WCO style short passing game to the Back. Trying to get some rhythm, but the sacks and penalties kept disrupting that. We can't run it when we are always behind the sticks. 2nd and 17 is not a running down.
Offline macbob  
#84 Posted : Saturday, June 22, 2013 9:01:22 AM(UTC)

Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Gold: 2013PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2014FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Silver: 2012PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Silver: 2012FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2014

Rank: Senior Member
Joined: 10/12/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 344
Applause Received: 289
Dexter_Sinister said: Go to Quoted Post
In the Seattle game McCarthey was probably thinking in that since we only have Benson and he sucks, we should try and supplement the running game with a WCO style short passing game to the Back.


So, basically you're saying Mike McCarthy decided to abandon the running game (because Benson sucked). :-"

And yes, I still consider running the ball on one play in the first quarter and on three plays total in the first half while passing the ball 27 plays qualifying as abandoning the run, not 'supplementing the running game'.
Offline DoddPower  
#85 Posted : Saturday, June 22, 2013 12:34:12 PM(UTC)

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Gold: 2011

Rank: Veteran Member
United States
Joined: 9/24/2007(UTC)
Location: Visalia, CA
Applause Given: 2,574
Applause Received: 668
macbob said: Go to Quoted Post
So, basically you're saying Mike McCarthy decided to abandon the running game (because Benson sucked). :-"

And yes, I still consider running the ball on one play in the first quarter and on three plays total in the first half while passing the ball 27 plays qualifying as abandoning the run, not 'supplementing the running game'.



Whether Benson truly sucked, or not, I don't think that was the issue at times early last season. I think the coaching staff felt relatively confident in him. I just think they feel more confident in Aaron Rodgers and the passing game. As they most certainly should. That's always going to be the case except maybe if the Packers had Adrian Peterson and even then it's going to be close. So regardless, patient must be maintained in the play-calling and the offensive line play must improve. Those two are inseparable and integrated together.
Offline Dexter_Sinister  
#86 Posted : Saturday, June 22, 2013 6:57:09 PM(UTC)

Rank: Registered
Joined: 6/12/2010(UTC)
Applause Given: 292
Applause Received: 266
Since Benson truly sucked right out of the gate against SF and they had no one else who could run, there wasn't much choice in the matter.

They started giving Benson the ball and he got diminishing touches with each drive. 2 of the first 4 plays being runs. After 6 runs for 12 yards, they kind of gave up on Benson.
Offline DarkaneRules  
#87 Posted : Sunday, June 23, 2013 10:28:07 AM(UTC)

Rank: Senior Member
Joined: 8/15/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 250
Applause Received: 411
That is why it is important not to get too involved with one reason why a game is lost because there are so many variables and each player on both teams has a part in it as well as the coaches. As I understand it, sticking to your game plan in times of adversity can certainly be one of the hardest decisions coaches can make in professional sports.

One of the reasons the naysayers say we are not physical enough is that we rarely impose our will in the run game. So we can blame coaching, schematics, the players, and/or give credit to the opposing defenses... it is a part of all those things. Or we can also look at Aaron Rodgers can say the more times he has the ball in his hands the better. Sometimes yes, but clearly that leads to being one-dimensional as they say.

It is safe to assume that losing the way we did to the Giants and 49ers, who are widely known as the more physical of the NFC teams, had a lot to do with moving o-line players which effects schematics and drafting two highly regarding running backs in the draft which should effect performance in a positive way.

And yes Benson sucked... haha
Offline Dexter_Sinister  
#88 Posted : Sunday, June 23, 2013 3:31:59 PM(UTC)

Rank: Registered
Joined: 6/12/2010(UTC)
Applause Given: 292
Applause Received: 266
DarkaneRules said: Go to Quoted Post
That is why it is important not to get too involved with one reason why a game is lost because there are so many variables and each player on both teams has a part in it as well as the coaches. As I understand it, sticking to your game plan in times of adversity can certainly be one of the hardest decisions coaches can make in professional sports.

One of the reasons the naysayers say we are not physical enough is that we rarely impose our will in the run game. So we can blame coaching, schematics, the players, and/or give credit to the opposing defenses... it is a part of all those things. Or we can also look at Aaron Rodgers can say the more times he has the ball in his hands the better. Sometimes yes, but clearly that leads to being one-dimensional as they say.

It is safe to assume that losing the way we did to the Giants and 49ers, who are widely known as the more physical of the NFC teams, had a lot to do with moving o-line players which effects schematics and drafting two highly regarding running backs in the draft which should effect performance in a positive way.

And yes Benson sucked... haha


The Packers beat the Texans , the Vikings 2 times and the Bears 2 times.

Those are also physical Ds.
Offline DarkaneRules  
#89 Posted : Sunday, June 23, 2013 6:55:12 PM(UTC)

Rank: Senior Member
Joined: 8/15/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 250
Applause Received: 411
Well yeah ... thats kinda part of the point :) Everyone team is physical. It's football. It seems like the word applies more however to those teams that can impose their will on the other in the run game more consistently is what I was trying to get across.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
Dexter_Sinister on 6/23/2013(UTC)
Offline Dexter_Sinister  
#90 Posted : Sunday, June 23, 2013 7:54:25 PM(UTC)

Rank: Registered
Joined: 6/12/2010(UTC)
Applause Given: 292
Applause Received: 266
macbob said: Go to Quoted Post
So, basically you're saying Mike McCarthy decided to abandon the running game (because Benson sucked). :-"

And yes, I still consider running the ball on one play in the first quarter and on three plays total in the first half while passing the ball 27 plays qualifying as abandoning the run, not 'supplementing the running game'.


Abandon what running game?

We didn't have a running game to abandon.

Included in the design of the WCO is replacing a portion of the running game with what becomes a really long hand off.

The Packers did try to do that. What it is called isn't as important as what its function is in the offense. A screen is kind of replacing the draw. Swing pass kind of replaces a sweep in function. It goes into the "pass" stat column, but the function is more like that of a run.

They were out of running backs and they had to replace Bensons running with something.

Because, as I said.

Benson sucked.

Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest
7 Pages«<4567>
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


Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (14h) : Get it going!
gbguy20 (14h) : press conferences galore today and yesterday, new jersey unveiled WHAT ARE WE EVEN TALKING ABOUT
gbguy20 (14h) : First practice is tomorrow, why have i seen literally no talk about this on the forum?
Zero2Cool (25-Jul) : Steelers August 23 game vs. Green Bay moved to 1 p.m.
Zero2Cool (22-Jul) : I was saying before it would be awesome if he did a story a week on YouTube or something.
Cheesey (22-Jul) : They should make a DVD of just stories from the "Favre years". It would be awesome!
Zero2Cool (19-Jul) : That was really awesome. I wish more stories were told.
Zero2Cool (18-Jul) : Wanna watch it?
dhazer (18-Jul) : Packers all day including the ceremony tonight in chat
dhazer (18-Jul) : why doesnt this work
Smokey (18-Jul) : less posting = less abuse
gbguy20 (18-Jul) : smokey lives
Smokey (17-Jul) : Perfect ?
Zero2Cool (17-Jul) : Perfect time to clean the shouty boxy ;-)
Please sign in to use Fan Shout

Road To Super Bowl 50
Sunday, Sep 13 @ 12:00 PM
at Bears
Sunday, Sep 20 @ 7:30 PM
SEAHAWKS
Monday, Sep 28 @ 7:30 PM
CHIEFS
Sunday, Oct 4 @ 3:25 PM
at 49ers
Sunday, Oct 11 @ 12:00 PM
RAMS
Sunday, Oct 18 @ 3:25 PM
CHARGERS
Sunday, Oct 25 @ 12:00 AM
- BYE -
Sunday, Nov 1 @ 7:30 PM
at Broncos
Sunday, Nov 8 @ 12:00 PM
at Panthers
Sunday, Nov 15 @ 12:00 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 22 @ 12:00 PM
at Vikings
Thursday, Nov 26 @ 7:30 PM
BEARS
Thursday, Dec 3 @ 7:25 PM
at Lions
Sunday, Dec 13 @ 3:25 PM
COWBOYS
Sunday, Dec 20 @ 3:05 PM
at Raiders
Sunday, Dec 27 @ 3:25 PM
at Cardinals
Sunday, Jan 3 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS

Think About It
Think About It

Recent Topics
3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / musccy

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / musccy

5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

11h / Green Bay Packers Talk / gbguy20

11h / Green Bay Packers Talk / RainX

15h / Green Bay Packers Talk / steveishere

15h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

18h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

21h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Grabacr

28-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

28-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / texaspackerbacker

28-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey


Tweeter