Rockmolder
14 years ago
Packers' plethora of issues begins with lack of run game 

By Michael Lombardi

It's was fun to look into a crystal ball and predict the future, especially in the height of summer trying to figure out which team has a Super Bowl feel to it.

The Packers this summer looked super, and I had them going to the big game. Since then, though, their vaunted offense has not been as dazzling as I thought, and their defense -- which was suspect even in the summer -- has been more suspect than I once thought.

So what happened? Some might say injuries, yet even when the Packers were completely healthy their offense was not zooming along.

The first noticeable weakness in the Packers' offense is their lack of a power runner, a back who can break tackles and make those tough yards and make an opposing defense respect the run -- if even a little. The Saints, who were devastated with injuries in their backfield, found Chris Ivory to add to their already talented team. Meanwhile, the Packers placed their hopes in Brandon Jackson, who has yet to prove he is more than just a nickel runner operating best when the formation is spread.

No one watching the Packers on tape respects their running game, therefore the burden of offensive success falls squarely onto the shoulders of Aaron Rodgers. They rank 27th in rushes and completions combine, averaging slightly over 43. Part of the problem why Green Bay isn't ranked higher in this area are the drops, as the Packers average almost eight dropped passes a game, ranking 18th in the league. Last year the Packers offense averaged almost 49 rushes and completions ranking seventh in the league, and although there is only a five-play decline from a year ago, this is significant.

Losing Ryan Grant did hurt this team, and their reluctance to supplement their running game with another back affects their production. John Kuhn runs hard, but he he looks more like a West Coast fullback.

The most glaring weakness with the Packers' passing game besides the dropped passes is their inability to gain yards after the catch. There was a time when their wide receivers were the best in yards after the catch, but now they rank 18th in the NFL. They still make big plays, having 21 pass plays of more than 20 yards -- with four touchdowns -- ranking fourth, but the inability to break tackles and make the extra yards is hurting the Packers.

Unlock HQ Video HQ video delivered by Akamai

Which then leads to their defense, because even though the offense is not as explosive as it appeared this summer, they still rank second in the league in first-half point differential (plus 33), tied for second with Pittsburgh. Yet their defense can't seem to ever get control of the game, or increase the lead, making the one key play that can put the game away. In fact, they allow the fifth most points in the fourth quarter.

This Sunday against the Brett Favre-led Vikings, the Packers can't drop passes, they need to find a running game, and when they get the lead, put the game away with their ability to scheme and put pressure with their defense. That is the formula they need to be successful and for them to be SUPER.

PackFanWithTwins
14 years ago
One question, when was the offense Completely healthy. For that part of 1 qtr before Grant got hurt?
The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
longtimefan
14 years ago
lack of run game or lack of STICKING to it?

4.6 yards per carry
K_Buz
14 years ago
I'm haven't been a big fan of BJack, but he is steadily changing my mind. Not that I think he can be a feature back, but he is doing a heck of a job. 4.6 yds/carry is more than acceptable. Our coach just needs to use the run game more.
peteralan71
14 years ago

I'm haven't been a big fan of BJack, but he is steadily changing my mind. Not that I think he can be a feature back, but he is doing a heck of a job. 4.6 yds/carry is more than acceptable. Our coach just needs to use the run game more.

"K_Buz" wrote:



4.6 ypc with 67 attempts. Without the 71 yard run a few weeks ago, he's sitting at 3.5 ypc, which I doubt many people here would be terribly pumped about. Three runs still gets you a first down, on average, but I know we'd like to see more than 3.5, so maybe the 4.6 ypc is null since it is skewed by one run.
Green Bay: Home of the Green & Gold. And the hunter orange. And the camouflage.
UserPostedImage
K_Buz
14 years ago
No, that's the nature of running backs. You can't take out the long runs because they happened.

Barry Sanders (no I am not comparing BJack to Sanders) was notorious for zero yard gains then breaking the big one. Should we take out his long runs too?

If anything, that should be encouraging that he can break a big one.
Rockmolder
14 years ago

No, that's the nature of running backs. You can't take out the long runs because they happened.

Barry Sanders (no I am not comparing BJack to Sanders) was notorious for zero yard gains then breaking the big one. Should we take out his long runs too?

If anything, that should be encouraging that he can break a big one.

"K_Buz" wrote:



I'm a littled divided on this one.

On one side, he made that long run. It might've been a little flukey if you look at the rest of his career, but it should count against his average just as well as his -2 yard runs do, which drag his YPC down.

On the other side, 67 runs isn't that big a sample. Assuming that he won't break another one and it was nothing more than getting lucky once, that one run really skews his stats and exceptations.

Thing is, you can't really say anything about it right now. Barry Sanders had 10 years to show that he could off-set those -5 yard runs with some amazing gains, cementing him as the best RB ever (suck it, Wade).

If we'll keep using him like this, he'll get 180 carries. Still not as substantial a number as most featured backs would get to, but at least you can read a bit more into that.
K_Buz
14 years ago
Here's my issue...

BJack, in his short career, hasn't been a "featured back". With Grant out, and nobody on the team besides BJack to take his place, he has to be the guy. With the exception of last week where he ran the ball 18 times and even to some extent last week too, the way McCarthy uses BJack and the run game in general is spotty at best.

There is no rhythm to the run game. How can a guy be productive when he gets one/two rushes per drive (at most)? BJack COULD raise his stats if he continued to get 15-20 rushes per game. But if the Packers continue to use him as they currently do, he won't get better.

I see it as a chicken and the egg situation. The only possible way to get productivity out of the run game is to stay with it, but we don't stay with it because it isn't that productive right now. However, the answer is simple to me. With the way Rodgers is playing scared, we NEED a running game and a short passing game to take the pressure off Aaron and the OLine.
nerdmann
14 years ago
It would be nice if this guy actually DID watch some game tape before writing this type of stupid bullshit. Bjack is doing just fine at RB. The problem is he's getting a maximum of like 10 carries per game. That and they try to run him behind Cliffy half the time.
Then he contradicts himself. Is the biggest problem the "lack of run game?" Or is it the drops? Make up your mind dude. And differentiate between lack of RB and lack of carries.
I've been saying for over a year that Jackson is better than Grant. Jackson is now getting an opportunity to prove that. Like losing Kampman last year, this actually helps us overall. Or SHOULD be, if we actually used him.
Oh yeah, the defense hasn't cost us a game yet. They seem to actually show up for 60 minutes. Sure, they had some letdowns when they lost Clay late in that game, but the score shouldn't have even been close at that stage.
Throw in some poorly timed shanked punts and it's a recipe for disaster. Wow, this article doesn't mention Special Teams. Which in our case are truly "special."
“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.”
Zero2Cool
14 years ago

No, that's the nature of running backs. You can't take out the long runs because they happened.

Barry Sanders (no I am not comparing BJack to Sanders) was notorious for zero yard gains then breaking the big one. Should we take out his long runs too?

If anything, that should be encouraging that he can break a big one.

"K_Buz" wrote:



Isn't it amazing how some people manipulate stats in their favor of their opinion?

Take this out, consider this, add that, minus this and the guy just sucks man!!
UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
Martha Careful (15h) : thank you Mucky for sticking up for me
Martha Careful (15h) : some of those people are smarter than you zero. However Pete Carroll is not
Mucky Tundra (19h) : Rude!
beast (20h) : Martha? 😋
Zero2Cool (23h) : Raiders hired someone from the elderly home.
dfosterf (24-Jan) : I'm going with a combination of the two.
beast (24-Jan) : Either the Cowboys have no idea what they're doing, or they're targeting their former OC, currently the Eagles OC
Zero2Cool (23-Jan) : Fake news. Cowboys say no
Zero2Cool (23-Jan) : Mystery candidate in the Cowboys head coaching search believed to be Packers ST Coordinator Rich Bisaccia.
beast (23-Jan) : Also why do both NYC teams have absolutely horrible OL for over a decade?
beast (23-Jan) : I wonder why the Jets always hire defensive coaches to be head coach
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Still HC positions available out there. I wonder if Hafley pops up for one
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Trent Baalke is out as the Jaguars GM.
dfosterf (22-Jan) : Jeff Hafley would have been a better choice, fortunately they don't know that. Someone will figure that out next off season
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Aaron Glenn Planning To Take Jets HC Job
dfosterf (22-Jan) : Martha- C'est mon boulot! 😁
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you
wpr (22-Jan) : Z, glad you are feeling better.
wpr (22-Jan) : My son and D-I-L work for UM. It's a way to pick on them.
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you. I rarely get sick, and even more rarely sick to the point I can't work.
wpr (22-Jan) : Beast- back to yesterday, I CAN say OSU your have been Michigan IF the odds of making the playoffs were more urgent.
dfosterf (22-Jan) : Glad to hear you are feeling a bit better.
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : I've been near death ill last several days, finally feel less dead and site issues.
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : It is a big deal. This host is having issues. It's frustrating.
Martha Careful (22-Jan) : just kidding...it was down
Martha Careful (22-Jan) : you were blocked yesterday, due to a a recalcitrant demeanor yesterday in the penalty box for a recalcitrant demeanor
dfosterf (22-Jan) : Was that site shutdown on your end or mine? No big deal, just curious
beast (21-Jan) : That way teams like Indiana and SMU don't make the conference championships by simply avoiding all the other good teams in their own confere
beast (21-Jan) : Also, with these "Super Conferences" instead of a single conference champion, have 4 teams make a Conference playoffs.
beast (21-Jan) : Also in college football, is a bye week a good or bad thing?
Martha Careful (21-Jan) : The tournament format was fine. Seeding could use some work.
beast (21-Jan) : You can't assume Ohio State would of won the Michigan game...
beast (21-Jan) : Rankings were 1) Oregon 2) Georgia 3) Texas 4) Penn State 5) Notre Dame 6) Ohio State, none of the rest mattered
wpr (21-Jan) : Texas, ND and OSU would have been fighting for the final 2 slots.
wpr (21-Jan) : Oregon and Georgia were locks. Without the luxury of extra playoff berths, Ohios St would have been more focused on Michigan game.
wpr (21-Jan) : Zero, no. If there were only 4 teams Ohio State would have been one of them. Boise St and ASU would not have been selected.
Zero2Cool (21-Jan) : So that was 7 vs 8, that means in BCS they never would made it?
Martha Careful (21-Jan) : A great game. Give ND credit for coming back, although I am please with the outcome.
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : FG to make it academic
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : and there's the dagger
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : ooooo 8 point game with 4 minutes to go!
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : ooooooooohhhhhh he missed!
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Ooooo that completion makes things VERY interesting
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Game not over yet
beast (21-Jan) : Oh yeah, Georgia starting quarterback season ending elbow injury
beast (21-Jan) : Sadly something happened to Georgia... they should be playing in this game against Ohio State
beast (21-Jan) : I thought Ohio State and Texas were both better than Notre Dame & Penn State
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Notre Lame getting rolled
Martha Careful (21-Jan) : Ohio State just got punched in the gut. Lets see how they respond
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Notre Lame vs the Luckeyes, bleh
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM
Eagles
Recent Topics
6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

15h / Random Babble / Martha Careful

21-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

21-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

19-Jan / Random Babble / Martha Careful

18-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

17-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

17-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

17-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

16-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.