Johnson
14 years ago

Question - would you rather have 150 running yards or 45 points?

The answer to that question is the answer to your question. I don't care how we get the points. We win games by scoring. If it's 50 runs and 1 pass, cool. If it's 50 passes and 1 run, cool. Passing gives us our best chance of scoring.

As for our RBs, Jackson's blocking ability cannot be praised enough. His blocking is in the top 30% of what I've seen, and I've watched a lot of RBs since 1976. I'm very proud of him.

FYI - The Steelers won the SB two years ago with 58 total yards rushing. The Saints won the SB last year with even less. Should we take away their Lombardi trophies because they didn't get enough rushing yards?

"zombieslayer" wrote:



I'd rather have 150 yards AND 45 points. Yes, the Steelers and Saints won on the arm, but here's a question for you: Would you rather have a one-dimensional offense or a balanced offense? Yes the Pack put up 45 in the air yesterday, but they did against a team that laid down like a yellow dog near the end of the first quarter. It cost their coach his job today. And I wouldn't count on being able to pass for the win very often, especially in playoff games.

Another question: How many games have we lost this year because of a lack of a running game?
blank
Since69
14 years ago

Yes the Pack put up 45 in the air yesterday...

"Johnson" wrote:



21, actually...
UserPostedImage
Nonstopdrivel
14 years ago
Dude, this team has lost 3 games by a grand total of 9 points. It's not like these losses have been catastrophic. The Packers have been in every game up until the very end. Hell, two of the losses were in overtime!
UserPostedImage
Stevetarded
14 years ago

Question - would you rather have 150 running yards or 45 points?

The answer to that question is the answer to your question. I don't care how we get the points. We win games by scoring. If it's 50 runs and 1 pass, cool. If it's 50 passes and 1 run, cool. Passing gives us our best chance of scoring.

As for our RBs, Jackson's blocking ability cannot be praised enough. His blocking is in the top 30% of what I've seen, and I've watched a lot of RBs since 1976. I'm very proud of him.

FYI - The Steelers won the SB two years ago with 58 total yards rushing. The Saints won the SB last year with even less. Should we take away their Lombardi trophies because they didn't get enough rushing yards?

"Johnson" wrote:



I'd rather have 150 yards AND 45 points. Yes, the Steelers and Saints won on the arm, but here's a question for you: Would you rather have a one-dimensional offense or a balanced offense? Yes the Pack put up 45 in the air yesterday, but they did against a team that laid down like a yellow dog near the end of the first quarter. It cost their coach his job today. And I wouldn't count on being able to pass for the win very often, especially in playoff games.

Another question: How many games have we lost this year because of a lack of a running game?

"zombieslayer" wrote:



Why wouldn't you count on being able to pass for the win very often? We have good enough players to do it and plenty of other teams do it. It's not like there is some magical run/pass ratio that makes you win. Passing is the obvious strength of the team so that's obviously what will be utilized the most.

They used a good mix of runs in the Dallas game and it worked out pretty well. Only time will tell if they stick to the same plan and how effective it will be but I don't see the problem with how things went on Sunday regardless or whether they reached some irrelevant quota of rushing yards.
blank
macbob
14 years ago

Macbob - On paper yes. In reality, all rules go out the window.

Weird tidbit, in the last 2 SBs, all 4 teams failed to get 100 yards rushing. 2 of them won. 2 of them lost.

"zombieslayer" wrote:



lol on none of the teams getting 100 yds and 2 winning and 2 losing. I'll bet if they'd all gotten 100 yds 2 of the 100 yd teams would have won and 2 would have lost. :tongue:

Looking at our stats this year, in the games we've won we ran the ball (subtracting out AR's runs) 28, 22, 18, 20, 23, and 30. In the games we lost we ran the ball 13, 13, and 17 times. That's a statistically significant difference between the wins and losses.

But which came first--chicken or the egg? Are we running because we're winning/ahead, or are we winning because we're running/have a more balanced attack?

Looking at the splits from ESPN, we dont run more (as a percentage) when were ahead compared to when were tied. McCarthy has passed 184 times and rushed 141 times when the Packers are winning. Thats a 56/44% split. Comparing that to when were tied, McCarthy has passed 77 times to 55 rushes, a 58/42% split, not significantly different. So the differenece between the rushes in the games we've won vs the games we've lost is NOT due to being behind and passing more in an attempt to catch up.

A pleasant side note from looking at the splits was weve been winning/ahead way more than tied/losing this year. The games we lost we were winning through 3 quarters and lost on 4th quarter/overtime collapses. The Packers have run 325 plays when leading vs 198 when tied/losing (132 when tied, 66 while losing).
macbob
14 years ago

Why wouldn't you count on being able to pass for the win very often? We have good enough players to do it and plenty of other teams do it. It's not like there is some magical run/pass ratio that makes you win. Passing is the obvious strength of the team so that's obviously what will be utilized the most.

They used a good mix of runs in the Dallas game and it worked out pretty well. Only time will tell if they stick to the same plan and how effective it will be but I don't see the problem with how things went on Sunday regardless or whether they reached some irrelevant quota of rushing yards.

"Stevetarded" wrote:



It's not really a rushing yardage question, it's a rushing attempts question. Having a credible running game makes our passing game better. The DL can't tee off on our quarterback as much, play action passes are more effective, etc. In the Dallas game we had 34 passing plays to 30 rushes. That is a MUCH higher commitment to the running game than McCarthy normally makes.

Subtracting out AR's runs, in our 3 losses, McCarthy has a pass/rush ratio of 124/43, or 74/26%. In our 6 wins, we have a ratio of 181 passes/141 rushes, or 56/44%. That difference is NOT due to us being behind--weve been ahead in all games this year through 3 quarters. Thats been a conscious decision by the coach to abandon the run game. And were 0-3 in those games, 6-0 in the games with a more balanced attack.
Dexter_Sinister
14 years ago
West coast offense people. We use short dump off and screen passes like a running game. Add the RBs' receiving yards and the total is pretty respectable. We also split our carries more evenly. Jackson has just under twice as many carries as Kuhn. AP has nearly 10 times the carries of Gerhart.

Minnesota's rushing yards per game is lower in their wins. They have 2 wins where AP had 81 and 73 yards. They had 2 of their losses where AP had 145 and 131 yards.

It is nice to have a decent running game, but it is hyperbole to say it would guarantee any win or its lack of would guarantee a loss. A completely unfounded statement.
I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.
Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
macbob
14 years ago

West coast offense people. We use short dump off and screen passes like a running game. Add the RBs' receiving yards and the total is pretty respectable. We also split our carries more evenly. Jackson has just under twice as many carries as Kuhn. AP has nearly 10 times the carries of Gerhart.

Minnesota's rushing yards per game is lower in their wins. They have 2 wins where AP had 81 and 73 yards. They had 2 of their losses where AP had 145 and 131 yards.

It is nice to have a decent running game, but it is hyperbole to say it would guarantee any win or its lack of would guarantee a loss. A completely unfounded statement.

"Dexter_Sinister" wrote:



Don't see anyone 'guaranteeing' a win. The argument isn't how many yards the running game is getting, it's having a credible running game to keep the defense honest. I would be surprised if anyone here would make the argument that the Vikings don't have a credible running game.

Heck, subtracting out Rodger's 30 yds on 4 carries, we had 127 yds on the ground against the Redskins. It was by far our highest rushing total this year. But we only ran the ball 13 times to 46 passes. That is NOT balanced and the defense could tee-off on the passing game. Two of Rodger's lowest completion % have come in these games where we've completely abandoned the run. And we lost.
zombieslayer
14 years ago

West coast offense people. We use short dump off and screen passes like a running game. Add the RBs' receiving yards and the total is pretty respectable. We also split our carries more evenly. Jackson has just under twice as many carries as Kuhn. AP has nearly 10 times the carries of Gerhart.

Minnesota's rushing yards per game is lower in their wins. They have 2 wins where AP had 81 and 73 yards. They had 2 of their losses where AP had 145 and 131 yards.

It is nice to have a decent running game, but it is hyperbole to say it would guarantee any win or its lack of would guarantee a loss. A completely unfounded statement.

"Dexter_Sinister" wrote:



Exactly on all points. I'd take a 7 yard completion over a 4 yard run any day of the week. That was Bill Walsh's statement, not mine. I agree with Walsh.

Walsh asked the reporter - what would you rather face, 2nd and 3 or 2nd and 6?

I don't hate the run. It's nice to have. But not necessary. You can win a SB without a running game as has been shown over and over again. And yes, winning the SB means you won your playoff games. I've had people argue with me that said we won't go far in the Playoffs without a running game but then I'll show them actual facts of teams in the past 10 years who won the SB without a running game, but then they'll say we can't win in the Playoffs without a running game.

Go figure. I'm actually getting sick of saying the same thing over and over again and copying and pasting the same stats over and over again.

+1 by the way.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
Stevetarded
14 years ago

West coast offense people. We use short dump off and screen passes like a running game. Add the RBs' receiving yards and the total is pretty respectable. We also split our carries more evenly. Jackson has just under twice as many carries as Kuhn. AP has nearly 10 times the carries of Gerhart.

Minnesota's rushing yards per game is lower in their wins. They have 2 wins where AP had 81 and 73 yards. They had 2 of their losses where AP had 145 and 131 yards.

It is nice to have a decent running game, but it is hyperbole to say it would guarantee any win or its lack of would guarantee a loss. A completely unfounded statement.

"macbob" wrote:



Don't see anyone 'guaranteeing' a win. The argument isn't how many yards the running game is getting, it's having a credible running game to keep the defense honest. I would be surprised if anyone here would make the argument that the Vikings don't have a credible running game.

Heck, subtracting out Rodger's 30 yds on 4 carries, we had 127 yds on the ground against the Redskins. It was by far our highest rushing total this year. But we only ran the ball 13 times to 46 passes. That is NOT balanced and the defense could tee-off on the passing game. Two of Rodger's lowest completion % have come in these games where we've completely abandoned the run. And we lost.

"Dexter_Sinister" wrote:



Isn't that what this thread is about?
blank
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (6h) : Chiefs again huh? I guess another Super Bowl I'll be finding something else to do.
Mucky Tundra (16h) : Chiefs Eagles...again...sigh
dfosterf (17h) : Happy Birthday Dave!
Mucky Tundra (18h) : happy birthday dhazer
TheKanataThrilla (20h) : Exactly buck...Washington came up with the ball. It is just a shitty coincidence one week later
buckeyepackfan (20h) : I forgot, they corrected the call a week later. Lol btw HAPPY BIRTHDAY dhazer!
buckeyepackfan (20h) : That brings up the question, why wasn't Nixon down by contact? I think that was the point Kanata was making.
buckeyepackfan (20h) : Turnovers rule, win the turnover battle, win the game.
packerfanoutwest (20h) : well, he was
TheKanataThrilla (20h) : Eagles down by contact on the fumble....fuck you NFL
Mucky Tundra (21h) : I think this games over
beast (21h) : Eagles sure get a lot of fumbles on kickoffs
Mucky Tundra (21h) : This game looks too big for Washington
packerfanoutwest (26-Jan) : that being said, The Ravens are the Browns
packerfanoutwest (26-Jan) : Browns, Dolphins have longest AFC Championship droughts
packerfanoutwest (26-Jan) : As of today, Cowboys have longest NFC Championship drought,
beast (26-Jan) : Someone pointed out, with Raiders hiring Carroll, the division games between Carroll and Jim Harbaugh are back on (who can whine more games)
beast (26-Jan) : I'm confused, Pete Carroll and Brian Schottenheimer? When Todd Monken, Joe Brady, Kellen Moore, Kliff Kingsbury and Zac Robinson are availab
Zero2Cool (25-Jan) : Any reason I'm catching a shot here about my intelligence?
Martha Careful (25-Jan) : thank you Mucky for sticking up for me
Martha Careful (25-Jan) : some of those people are smarter than you zero. However Pete Carroll is not
Mucky Tundra (24-Jan) : Rude!
beast (24-Jan) : Martha? 😋
Zero2Cool (24-Jan) : 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.
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 / packerfanoutwest

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

25-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

25-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

25-Jan / Random Babble / Martha Careful

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.