PackFanWithTwins
14 years ago
McCarthy does not stick with what is working. Against MN, we ran some quick plays, a couple screens and move the ball with ease on the first drive. Those plays disappeared the rest of the game. Only one of 4 games so far has Grant had 20 rushes. 16 against Chi getting 3.8 per, 14 vs Cin 3.3, 11 vs MN 4.6 per. None of those games had bad enough production to limit the carries that much.

The passing game needs help from the run. Just consistent use of it even if not gaining big yards will help Rodgers and the WRs.
The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
zombieslayer
14 years ago



In line with this reasoning, I miss seeing those short slant patterns. It seems that at least once a game the Pack used to break one of those for a big gainer. It seems this would be a good play to run frequently since our line can't seem to give Aaron Rodgers the protection for a 3-5 step drop. Also, given his obvious athleticism, I think Finley should be targeted much more often, perhaps 10-12 times per game (after he chips a rusher, that is).

"Kyle" wrote:



Agreed.

In life, you play to your strengths and cover your weaknesses. Same with football. More screens. More short slants. More passes to Finley and let him bruise some DBs. The short passes open up both the long passes and the running game. Or, it substitutes for the running game.

Now back on topic, this is EXACTLY what Mike McCarthy did in '07. Don't forget we were 7-1 without a running game that year. Notice how late in the game, Favre would complete a bomb? Well, exactly what I was saying - the short passing game opens up the long passing game. It also helps hide the fact that our OL sucks.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
warhawk
14 years ago
What your all touching on and what needs to happen is getting more production on first down.

I went through the play by play in the Vikes game and it clearly showed our struggles in this area.

Before the last couple of drives during the normal course of the game there were 16 first down plays. In twelve of those we were 2nd and eight or worse. On three we lost a fumble and Rodgers was sacked twice.

Only once did we make a first down on first down and the other three times we gained 9, 5, and 4 yards. In otherwords the defense won 12 of 16 first down plays.

Now there is no one way of turning that around. If the defense is set to take away the run or is set up to take away the short pass the best possible play has to be called according to how the defense is set up.

The short passing game in itself cannot be a catch all for what is ailing us. I remember two years ago when we were beating the snot out of the Bears in the first half with short passes and slants. They came out in the second half and took that away. Now that opened up other options that we couldn't capitalize on and we ended up losing the game.

Our offense needs to be more consistant and not rely on the big play. We will get our share of those but we can smother teams if we can sustain drives and that is going take better production on first down.
"The train is leaving the station."
evad04
14 years ago

McCarthy does not stick with what is working. Against MN, we ran some quick plays, a couple screens and move the ball with ease on the first drive. Those plays disappeared the rest of the game. Only one of 4 games so far has Grant had 20 rushes. 16 against Chi getting 3.8 per, 14 vs Cin 3.3, 11 vs MN 4.6 per. None of those games had bad enough production to limit the carries that much.

The passing game needs help from the run. Just consistent use of it even if not gaining big yards will help Rodgers and the WRs.

"PackFanWithTwins" wrote:


Let me say that I don't disagree with much that is in this post, but I'm not willing to budge on one particular issue: the run game against Minnie.

The 11 carries for 4.6 per carry are in themselves skewed numbers. Over half of those yards came on draw plays. They got about as much production as they could against Minnesota, and again, the gameplan we proceeded effective. Green Bay moved the ball pretty consistently, especially taking into account the sacks and especially at the beginning of the game (when, as pointed out, we left points off the board with turnovers).

I stand with the OP -- I like McCarthy's playcalling. I think it's kind of one of those jobs where you don't get the credit when things are going well.
William Henderson didn't have to run people over. His preferred method was levitation.
"I'm a reasonable man, get off my case."
Zero2Cool
14 years ago

Our running game is non existant. He can't call runs until we show we can gain more then 2 yards on a run.

"Cheesey" wrote:


Give the rock to the RB more often. It's hard to get into a rhythm for a RB and OL when you're running a run play once a leap year.
UserPostedImage
PackFanWithTwins
14 years ago

McCarthy does not stick with what is working. Against MN, we ran some quick plays, a couple screens and move the ball with ease on the first drive. Those plays disappeared the rest of the game. Only one of 4 games so far has Grant had 20 rushes. 16 against Chi getting 3.8 per, 14 vs Cin 3.3, 11 vs MN 4.6 per. None of those games had bad enough production to limit the carries that much.

The passing game needs help from the run. Just consistent use of it even if not gaining big yards will help Rodgers and the WRs.

"evad04" wrote:


Let me say that I don't disagree with much that is in this post, but I'm not willing to budge on one particular issue: the run game against Minnie.

The 11 carries for 4.6 per carry are in themselves skewed numbers. Over half of those yards came on draw plays. They got about as much production as they could against Minnesota, and again, the gameplan we proceeded effective. Green Bay moved the ball pretty consistently, especially taking into account the sacks and especially at the beginning of the game (when, as pointed out, we left points off the board with turnovers).

I stand with the OP -- I like McCarthy's playcalling. I think it's kind of one of those jobs where you don't get the credit when things are going well.

"PackFanWithTwins" wrote:



The biggest thing I don't like is the way the plays are called. One time nothing but runs, another nothing but passes. He doesn't seem to get them mixed consistently. In the MN game, there was not 2 consecutive runs through the 1st 3 qtrs of the game. The only time there were two consecutive runs, is when we were inside our own 10 and it was to setup a punt.

As for the draws against MN, they are the best thing to run against a line that provides that much pressure. Draws and screens, we have been calling for them for a couple weeks. He finally ran them, but not enough.

With the way the offense moved on the first drive with the short passes and screens, to not come back to that plan later was wrong. I am one who definately does not like his playcalling combinations.
The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
evad04
14 years ago

McCarthy does not stick with what is working. Against MN, we ran some quick plays, a couple screens and move the ball with ease on the first drive. Those plays disappeared the rest of the game. Only one of 4 games so far has Grant had 20 rushes. 16 against Chi getting 3.8 per, 14 vs Cin 3.3, 11 vs MN 4.6 per. None of those games had bad enough production to limit the carries that much.

The passing game needs help from the run. Just consistent use of it even if not gaining big yards will help Rodgers and the WRs.

"PackFanWithTwins" wrote:


Let me say that I don't disagree with much that is in this post, but I'm not willing to budge on one particular issue: the run game against Minnie.

The 11 carries for 4.6 per carry are in themselves skewed numbers. Over half of those yards came on draw plays. They got about as much production as they could against Minnesota, and again, the gameplan we proceeded effective. Green Bay moved the ball pretty consistently, especially taking into account the sacks and especially at the beginning of the game (when, as pointed out, we left points off the board with turnovers).

I stand with the OP -- I like McCarthy's playcalling. I think it's kind of one of those jobs where you don't get the credit when things are going well.

"evad04" wrote:



The biggest thing I don't like is the way the plays are called. One time nothing but runs, another nothing but passes. He doesn't seem to get them mixed consistently. In the MN game, there was not 2 consecutive runs through the 1st 3 qtrs of the game. The only time there were two consecutive runs, is when we were inside our own 10 and it was to setup a punt.

As for the draws against MN, they are the best thing to run against a line that provides that much pressure. Draws and screens, we have been calling for them for a couple weeks. He finally ran them, but not enough.

With the way the offense moved on the first drive with the short passes and screens, to not come back to that plan later was wrong. I am one who definately does not like his playcalling combinations.

"PackFanWithTwins" wrote:


You are definately entitled to your own opinion. I'm just failing to see the link in the Minnesota game. We ran screens and draws, but not enough? It wasn't like our problem was moving the ball. We moved the ball pretty well throughout -- sacks notwithstanding.

If you want to argue that more screens/draws would cut down on the sacks, I wouldn't necessarily disagree. But adding those plays in may not account for all the yards they accrued with the plays that were called. Does what I'm saying make sense?
William Henderson didn't have to run people over. His preferred method was levitation.
"I'm a reasonable man, get off my case."
PackFanWithTwins
14 years ago

You are definately entitled to your own opinion. I'm just failing to see the link in the Minnesota game. We ran screens and draws, but not enough? It wasn't like our problem was moving the ball. We moved the ball pretty well throughout -- sacks notwithstanding.

If you want to argue that more screens/draws would cut down on the sacks, I wouldn't necessarily disagree. But adding those plays in may not account for all the yards they accrued with the plays that were called. Does what I'm saying make sense?

"evad04" wrote:



For me it is not a matter of moving the ball. It is a matter of getting our QB killed. Screens, draws, not to mention 3-4 yards slants, curls, crossing routes stop the pass rush. I will see a series where there is a combination that works, then never again and we will be back to 5 medium to long passes to 1 run or something.

We always hear about play scripting, the entire purpose of the script is to have a set of practiced plays, and not to have to decide what to run. Call the play, and see what the D throws to defend. Then see what works and what doesn't, then follow up with the plays that work later in the game. Also to set up other plays, slant and go and stuff. I don't see Mike McCarthy going back to what worked, or using the WCO short game to setup the long balls anymore. He did that with Favre and with Rodgers some last year. I haven't seen it this year.

This year, the majority of the time, I don't even see us using the WCO anymore. We are going against most of the fundamental rules it was designed by.

as you say, that is just the way I see things going.
The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
evad04
14 years ago

You are definately entitled to your own opinion. I'm just failing to see the link in the Minnesota game. We ran screens and draws, but not enough? It wasn't like our problem was moving the ball. We moved the ball pretty well throughout -- sacks notwithstanding.

If you want to argue that more screens/draws would cut down on the sacks, I wouldn't necessarily disagree. But adding those plays in may not account for all the yards they accrued with the plays that were called. Does what I'm saying make sense?

"PackFanWithTwins" wrote:



For me it is not a matter of moving the ball. It is a matter of getting our QB killed. Screens, draws, not to mention 3-4 yards slants, curls, crossing routes stop the pass rush. I will see a series where there is a combination that works, then never again and we will be back to 5 medium to long passes to 1 run or something.

We always hear about play scripting, the entire purpose of the script is to have a set of practiced plays, and not to have to decide what to run. Call the play, and see what the D throws to defend. Then see what works and what doesn't, then follow up with the plays that work later in the game. Also to set up other plays, slant and go and stuff. I don't see Mike McCarthy going back to what worked, or using the WCO short game to setup the long balls anymore. He did that with Favre and with Rodgers some last year. I haven't seen it this year.

This year, the majority of the time, I don't even see us using the WCO anymore. We are going against most of the fundamental rules it was designed by.

as you say, that is just the way I see things going.

"evad04" wrote:


You raise some good points/observations. I think a more rigorous film-study would be in order. It's hard for me to make a determination about a play-call. The plays that ended in sacks -- how many of them were 5-step drop, downfield plays? Again going with the theme that MANY times the pressure came too quickly and with only four rushing, the quick passes aren't necessarily the better option. I can say that I know at least three of those sacks (I was watching with this in mind) were against some variation of a Cover 2 zone defense. This defense is designed to take away short/mid-range passing options. When a defense like that has the added bonus of excellent pressure with the front four, it can be a suffocatingly difficult defense to beat. For the record, many of the big plays we put up (late in the game against Minnesota) were more of the "downfield" variety.

I think you are right in that there needs to be more of a balance. And hey, just like many others on this board I'm a big fan of the slant pass! I do, however, think there's something to the way that McCarthy has been calling the games. You have to attack Cover 2 zone defenses up the deep middle -- look at some of the explosive plays from that game. Jordy Nelson's comes to mind.
William Henderson didn't have to run people over. His preferred method was levitation.
"I'm a reasonable man, get off my case."
porky88
14 years ago

Bottom line:

What are your problems with his playcalling? Specifics preferred.

Let's discuss.

"bt_impaler" wrote:



He's predictable. When he actually get a run play to work, he'll go back to the run for the next two plays. He never mixes things up or hasn't this year. He also throws on first-down way to often. That's one of the reasons why GB is in 3rd and long too much.

There is a difference between playcalling and managing a game or at least I think so. Going for it on fourth down, I agreed with except at the goaline. I do tend to like his aggressive nature. What I don't like is the plays he calls in the situations.

It gets very repetitive. I'd like to see a pass and run mix.
Fan Shout
wpr (40m) : Just about time to watch Sonny Weaver stick it to the seahags. I never get tired of it.
Martha Careful (43m) : *game plan
Martha Careful (1h) : IMHO, not even close. He is not a guy you game play around.
Mucky Tundra (3h) : is Aiyuk worth a 1st rounder?
Zero2Cool (4h) : 49ers are seeking a 1st round pick in exchange for WR Brandon Aiyuk
Mucky Tundra (22-Apr) : Based on Gutes comments, now I don't feel as silly having 13 picks in my mock the other day
Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : Zach Wilson to Broncos.
Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : Gutekunst says he'd love to have 13 or 14 picks. He's trading back huh lol
beast (22-Apr) : Someday we'll have a draft betting scandal
beast (21-Apr) : Sometimes looking extremely amazing, sometimes looking extremely lost
beast (21-Apr) : I haven't looked into the QBs, but some have suggested Maye has some of the most extremely inconsistent tape they've seen
beast (21-Apr) : Well it also sounds like Patriots are listening to trade offers, not that seriously considering any, but listening means they aren't locked
Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : Maye needs to be AFC
Mucky Tundra (21-Apr) : Not liking the idea of the Vikings getting Maye
Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : Vikings HC joked that he may or may not have sent flowers to Bob Kraft. That's where rumor came from.
beast (21-Apr) : Can't tell if this is real or BS, but some rumors about a possible Patriots/Vikings trade for #3 overall
dfosterf (21-Apr) : One playbook to my knowledge. I was shooting for facetious.
beast (20-Apr) : I'm not sure they have different playbooks for different OL positions, and Dillard run blocking is supposedly worse than his pass blocking..
dfosterf (19-Apr) : The only problem with that is he isn't a guard either.
dfosterf (19-Apr) : Put him at right guard. That is where he will be coached. That is where he will compete. He is not even allowed to look at the LT playbook.
dfosterf (18-Apr) : Kidding aside, I hope the best for him.
dfosterf (18-Apr) : Went to a Titans board. One comment there. Not very long. I quote: "LOL" They don't sound overly upset about our aquisition.
beast (18-Apr) : OT Dillard has been absolutely horrible... like OG Newman levels
dfosterf (18-Apr) : Suit him up and have him stand in front of the big board as a draft day cautionary tale.
Zero2Cool (18-Apr) : Packers sign T Andre Dillard.
Mucky Tundra (18-Apr) : Adds most of the information this time of year comes from agents.
Mucky Tundra (18-Apr) : @RealAlexBarth Bill Belichick says accurate draft information doesn't leak from teams until about 12 hours before the draft. Adds most of th
Mucky Tundra (18-Apr) : I am very happy that for moment, Jordan Love seems like a normal human being
Zero2Cool (17-Apr) : Belichick * whatever
Zero2Cool (17-Apr) : "There's a lot of depth at Offensive Tackle and Wide Receiver." Bill Bellichick
Zero2Cool (17-Apr) : Thanks! I can't believe it's over haha
Martha Careful (16-Apr) : Congratulations
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Boom. Student Loan. $0.00. Only took about 20 years.
Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : Packers DT Kenny Clark: New defensive coordinator Jeff Hafley will 'allow us to be way more disruptive'
Zero2Cool (12-Apr) : Saints have agreed to terms on a contract with former Packers wide receiver Equanimeous St. Brown.
beast (12-Apr) : No, but of it's for legislation, then half of the country will find it evil, not good, whatever it says....
Mucky Tundra (12-Apr) : Draft is still 2 weeks away. UGH
dhazer (11-Apr) : Does anyone know of a good AI generator to create letters of Support for legislation?
Zero2Cool (11-Apr) : Gordon "Red" Batty retires as equipment manager
Zero2Cool (10-Apr) : Sounds like that's pretty certain now.
Zero2Cool (10-Apr) : Packers "at" Eagles in Brazil. Week One
dfosterf (10-Apr) : Va' Fazer As Malas Va' !
Zero2Cool (9-Apr) : Mark Murphy tipping us off?
Zero2Cool (9-Apr) : “We’re either the first- or second-most popular team in Brazil.”
Zero2Cool (9-Apr) : Christian Watson got married. Wife better be careful with those hamstrings!! 😂😂
dfosterf (9-Apr) : Those poor bastards
Zero2Cool (8-Apr) : Falcons have signed former Packers CB Kevin King, who has been out of football since 2021.
dfosterf (8-Apr) : Collectively, we need to spend more time in what we have, when analyzing ostendible needs and historical proclivities
dfosterf (8-Apr) : I say he is better than so many of these draft picks
dfosterf (8-Apr) : Question of the week for me: Has anyone besides me done any deep dive into the potential of Alex McGough, our 3rd string qb?
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2023 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
Bears
Sunday, Sep 17 @ 12:00 PM
Falcons
Sunday, Sep 24 @ 12:00 PM
SAINTS
Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:15 PM
LIONS
Monday, Oct 9 @ 7:15 PM
Raiders
Sunday, Oct 22 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Nov 5 @ 12:00 PM
RAMS
Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
CHARGERS
Thursday, Nov 23 @ 11:30 AM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 3 @ 7:20 PM
CHIEFS
Monday, Dec 11 @ 7:15 PM
Giants
Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
BUCCANEERS
Sunday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
Panthers
Sunday, Dec 31 @ 7:20 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 7 @ 3:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Jan 14 @ 3:30 PM
Cowboys
Saturday, Jan 20 @ 7:15 PM
49ers
Recent Topics
now / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

22-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

22-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

21-Apr / Fantasy Sports Talk / dfosterf

21-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

19-Apr / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

18-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

18-Apr / Random Babble / Mucky Tundra

18-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

17-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

17-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

17-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Apr / Random Babble / Martha Careful

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.