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.
10 Pages«<78910>
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline nerdmann  
#81 Posted : Thursday, June 20, 2013 8:51:01 PM(UTC)
nerdmann

Rank: Most Valuable Player

Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 2,704
Applause Received: 663

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister 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.
“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.”
Offline play2win  
#82 Posted : Friday, June 21, 2013 6:27:03 AM(UTC)
play2win

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

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

Applause Given: 1,076
Applause Received: 725

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister 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.

Message modified by user Friday, June 21, 2013 11:24:22 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

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)
Dexter_Sinister

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

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.
I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.

Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
Offline macbob  
#84 Posted : Saturday, June 22, 2013 9:01:22 AM(UTC)
macbob

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

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

Joined: 10/12/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 304
Applause Received: 252

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister 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). Whistle

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'.
UserPostedImage
Offline DoddPower  
#85 Posted : Saturday, June 22, 2013 12:34:12 PM(UTC)
DoddPower

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Gold: 2011

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

Applause Given: 2,087
Applause Received: 528

Originally Posted by: macbob Go to Quoted Post
So, basically you're saying Mike McCarthy decided to abandon the running game (because Benson sucked). Whistle

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.

Message modified by user Sunday, June 23, 2013 10:44:30 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Offline Dexter_Sinister  
#86 Posted : Saturday, June 22, 2013 6:57:09 PM(UTC)
Dexter_Sinister

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

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.
I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.

Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
Offline DarkaneRules  
#87 Posted : Sunday, June 23, 2013 10:28:07 AM(UTC)
DarkaneRules

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/15/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 211
Applause Received: 357

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
Circular Arguments: They are a heck of an annoyance
Offline Dexter_Sinister  
#88 Posted : Sunday, June 23, 2013 3:31:59 PM(UTC)
Dexter_Sinister

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

Joined: 6/12/2010(UTC)

Applause Given: 292
Applause Received: 266

Originally Posted by: DarkaneRules 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.
I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.

Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
Offline DarkaneRules  
#89 Posted : Sunday, June 23, 2013 6:55:12 PM(UTC)
DarkaneRules

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/15/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 211
Applause Received: 357

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.
Circular Arguments: They are a heck of an annoyance
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)
Dexter_Sinister

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

Joined: 6/12/2010(UTC)

Applause Given: 292
Applause Received: 266

Originally Posted by: macbob Go to Quoted Post
So, basically you're saying Mike McCarthy decided to abandon the running game (because Benson sucked). Whistle

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.

I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.

Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest
10 Pages«<78910>
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 / sschind

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / porky88

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / sschind

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / macbob

6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DakotaT

10h / Green Bay Packers Talk / packman82

13h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

22-Nov / 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