Discussion Board
Welcome Guest! You can login or register. Login or Register.
5 Pages«<345

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
nerdmann  
#81 Posted : Thursday, June 20, 2013 8:51:01 PM(UTC)
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.
play2win  
#82 Posted : Friday, June 21, 2013 6:27:03 AM(UTC)
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.
Dexter_Sinister  
#83 Posted : Friday, June 21, 2013 12:27:31 PM(UTC)
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.
macbob  
#84 Posted : Saturday, June 22, 2013 9:01:22 AM(UTC)
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'.
DoddPower  
#85 Posted : Saturday, June 22, 2013 12:34:12 PM(UTC)
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.
Dexter_Sinister  
#86 Posted : Saturday, June 22, 2013 6:57:09 PM(UTC)
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.
DarkaneRules  
#87 Posted : Sunday, June 23, 2013 10:28:07 AM(UTC)
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
Dexter_Sinister  
#88 Posted : Sunday, June 23, 2013 3:31:59 PM(UTC)
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.
DarkaneRules  
#89 Posted : Sunday, June 23, 2013 6:55:12 PM(UTC)
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.
Dexter_Sinister  
#90 Posted : Sunday, June 23, 2013 7:54:25 PM(UTC)
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.

macbob  
#91 Posted : Monday, June 24, 2013 4:52:12 PM(UTC)
Dexter_Sinister said: Go to Quoted Post
Abandon what running game?

We didn't have a running game to abandon.


We are not (and should not be) primarily a running team, but running improves our passing game by giving the D something else they need to account for. If we're not running enough to give them something to account for then our offense will struggle--see the first half of the Seattle game, where we were losing 7-0 at half time.

We had enough of a running game in the second half to outscore Seattle 12-0 (I still refuse to credit them with that last TD).

And that was with the same RBs we had in the first half.

That was the running game that Mike McCarthy abandoned without even seeing if we could run successfully against Seattle.

Just like at SF in the playoffs, we abandoned the run in the second half, scoring all of 3 pts before a mop-up TD in the last minute.

It's not a coincidence.
Rss Feed
Users browsing this topic
Guest
5 Pages«<345
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
uffda udfa (11h) : Packers re-sign Christine Michael
Smokey (13h) : Easier said than fixed .
Nonstopdrivel (14h) : The web version lists who started the thread; the mobile version lists who last updated it.
Nonstopdrivel (14h) : Also, there's a weird disparity between the web version and online version of this site.
Nonstopdrivel (14h) : ;-)
Zero2Cool (21-Mar) : Packers wanted D. Ware in 2005. Thank you Cowboys!
Zero2Cool (21-Mar) : lol Rourke
Nonstopdrivel (21-Mar) : I HATE HATE HATE the way all threads get marked as read after viewing a few of them in one session. It's obnoxious.
Smokey (21-Mar) : Check out this site, NFLdraftscout.com , a great resource site.
Smokey (20-Mar) : Jared Cook signs with Raiders .
Smokey (20-Mar) : I did watch SB 45 on YouTube the other night, very eye opening .
Smokey (20-Mar) : Watching Spring Training Baseball, Nationals vs Yankees, very interesting .
Zero2Cool (19-Mar) : B1G making some noise in that bracket
Zero2Cool (19-Mar) : The more join, the more talk, the better. including John
Zero2Cool (19-Mar) : no forum should need one person, we have others, speak up!
gbguy20 (19-Mar) : slow forum needs more uffda
Smokey (19-Mar) : There's always next year .
Smokey (18-Mar) : Virginia is still in it !
Smokey (18-Mar) : On Wisconsin
Zero2Cool (18-Mar) : Down goes Villanova!! Badgers!!!
Zero2Cool (18-Mar) : Might have went into your SPAM or JUNK folder??
yooperfan (18-Mar) : Funny I never got the invite
wpr (17-Mar) : Ignoring the Signing Bonus, Jones' base is only $725K above the vet min
Zero2Cool (16-Mar) : Not many seem interested, but I did invite those from last year.
dhazer (16-Mar) : no bracket challenge Kevin?
Zero2Cool (16-Mar) : Blame twitter on the /home page here lol
Zero2Cool (16-Mar) : Datone Jones Vikings deal $3.75M, $1.6M signing bonus, $1.5M salary, $31,250 per game active, $150K workout bonus, $1.25M sacks-pt incentive
Zero2Cool (16-Mar) : Nope. I don't care to read up on Vikings players. :-)
Bnoble (15-Mar) : Anyone see any numbers on Jones deal?
uffda udfa (14-Mar) : Datone to Minnesota.
musccy (14-Mar) : A more $ than I'd prefer, but still glad Elliott is back
uffda udfa (14-Mar) : Jayrone back on a one year 1.6 deal.
Zero2Cool (13-Mar) : Martellus Bennett Contract Details: New Packers TE has just $3.85M cap hit in 2017
Zero2Cool (13-Mar) : Packers have $28 under cap yet
hardrocker950 (13-Mar) : Walden would be a nice pickup...
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2016 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 11 @ 12:00 PM
at Jaguars
Sunday, Sep 18 @ 7:30 PM
at Vikings
Sunday, Sep 25 @ 12:00 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Oct 2 @ 12:00 AM
BYE
Sunday, Oct 9 @ 7:30 PM
GIANTS
Sunday, Oct 16 @ 3:25 PM
COWBOYS
Thursday, Oct 20 @ 7:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Oct 30 @ 3:25 PM
at Falcons
Sunday, Nov 6 @ 3:25 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Nov 13 @ 12:00 PM
at Titans
Sunday, Nov 20 @ 7:30 PM
at Redskins
Monday, Nov 28 @ 7:30 PM
at Eagles
Sunday, Dec 4 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Dec 11 @ 3:25 PM
SEAHAWKS
Sunday, Dec 18 @ 12:00 PM
at Bears
Saturday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Jan 1 @ 7:30 PM
at Lions
Think About It
Think About It
Recent Topics
2h / Fantasy Sports Talk / Alisha Connolly

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / blueleopard

7h / Announcements / Smokey

8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

10h / Fantasy Sports Talk / Smokey

13h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Nonstopdrivel

21h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

21h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

20-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / gbguy20

17-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / yooperfan

17-Mar / Around The NFL / Smokey

17-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / gbguy20

17-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

Headlines