92 yards for the RB's, is this enough· Page 6

mi_keys
Senior Member

14 years ago

Uh oh. We only had 91 total rushing yards, with 26 of those total yards by our QBs. We must have lost to the Vikings this week.

"zombieslayer" wrote:

We did if the scoring works like it does in golf.

Born and bred a cheesehead

zombieslayer
Registered

14 years ago

#52

Yeah really Keys.

Earlier this season there was a lot of panic that if we can't get the running game going, we were going to lose. Well, our running game completely sucked today. Yet I look at the score and it's a blowout.

I'll be damned.

My man Donald Driver

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷

zombieslayer
Registered

14 years ago

#53

Because I like the sound of my own voice and love to argue about meaningless numbers that really have no relevance whatsoever in our lives other than the countless hours we spend arguing about them, here are our RB totals for the whole year and the result of the games.

Note that I say RB totals. Does not include WR runs or QB runs or streakers running on the field.

65 yards @MN - result - 31-3 Packers
97 yards vs Cows - result - 45-7 Packers
76 yards @Jets - result - 9-0 Packers
70 yards vs MN - result - 28-24 Packers
63 yards vs Dolphins - result - 23-20 loss
127 yards @Skins - result - 16-13 loss
72 yards vs Lions - result - 28-26 Packers
43 yards @da Bears - result - 20-17 loss
65 yards vs Bills - result - 34-7 Packers
123 yards @Eagles - result - 27-20 Packers

Morale of the story - we're not a running team, yet we keep winning games.

Whoops. I just realized I went backwards. The Eagles game was the first game of the season and the @MN game was the most recent one.

My man Donald Driver

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

14 years ago

#54

"zombieslayer" wrote:

thought i was reading my own post for a second there

warhawk
Senior Member

14 years ago

#55

I have said this so many times it's rediculous and pointed out the same thing about these "run game woes" threads.

What your asking DOESN'T happen. The very good passing teams just don't run the ball very well. Yeah, it would be GREAT if a team could pass and run it all over everybody but virtually NO team can accomplish it.

The top 10 passing teams with their ranking in run offense are as follows:

1) San Dieago - Run Offense 17th.
2) Denver - Run Offense 32nd
3) Indy - Run Offense 27
4) Saints - Run Offense 26th
5) Dallas - Run Offense 29th
6) Detroit - Run Offense 31st
7) Washinton - Run Offense 22nd
8) Philly - Run Offense 3rd
9) Cincy - Run Offense 23rd
10 Grn Bay - Run Offense 19th

Philly is the only team with rankings in the top 10 in both running and passing and we all know Vicks feet are a big reason why that is.

You also have to consider the teams drawn on the schedule. We have faced five teams ranked in the top 8 in run defense and it's not going to get a lot easier with Atlanta, the Giants, and Chicago coming up who are all in that top 8 group.

You want the run offense then revamp the Oline with a bunch of bulldozers not agile enough to provide great pass protection. You don't get it both ways. It's just how it works.

"The train is leaving the station."

Pack93z
Select Member

14 years ago

#56

It isn't about becoming a running team.. but it is about not forgetting that the run exists and when to call the play.

When we lined up in an "I" the first couple games of the season.. it almost always was a run.. gee I wonder why the defense was able to stone it.

The art is running it just enough, out of passing sets, to have the defense at least look for it.. not allowing them to pin their ears back every snap.

I don't want 50/50 balance.. or us to be in the top 10.

But I do want us to run it out of a one back passing set here and there.. I want them to set up screens to make the pass rush respect the potential. And MM has been utilizing the run much more effectively.. not in gaining yards but slowing the defensive fronts.

Nothing more.

Go back to the early season struggles.. the play calling was predictable as hell.. and it allowed the defense to focus on one element of the offense. Making it too easy on them..

This is a dynamic offense.. but do the dirty work to keep it oiled.

"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

14 years ago

#57

^^ What Shawn said, I agree with.

Rockmolder
Honored Member

14 years ago

#58

It isn't about becoming a running team.. but it is about not forgetting that the run exists and when to call the play.

When we lined up in an I the first couple games of the season.. it almost always was a run.. gee I wonder why they defense is able to stone it.

The art is running it just enough, out of passing sets, to have the defense at least look for it.. not allowing them to pin their ears back every snap.

I don't want 50/50 balance.. or us to be in the top 10.

But I do want us to run it out of a one back passing set here and there.. I want them to set up screens to make the pass rush respect the potential. And Mike McCarthy has been utilizing the run much more effectively.. not in gaining yards but slowing the defensive fronts.

Nothing more.

Go back to the early season struggles.. the play calling was predictable as hell.. and it allowed the defense to focus on one element of the offense. Making it too easy on them..

This is a dynamic offense.. but do the dirty work to keep it oiled.

"pack93z" wrote:

And I loved this about yesterday's game.

We had multiple draw plays that went for 5 yards, with Edwards, K. Williams and Allen already being 5 yard deep in the backfield at the moment we handed the ball off. They were trying to get that pass rush going so desperately that we caught them off guard a few times with the draw.

And it had effect on at least the two next plays after that.

I agree with the predictable playcalling, as well.

I was amazed to see a pass out of the I with Quinn Johnson on the field.

Normally, the I is a run.

And QJ on the field is a run.

It's all so predictable.

I love that we're finally mixing it up a bit. I love it when we run out of singe back sets. I like seeing some runs out of the shotgun, as long as we won't go overboard. Play-action out of the wishbone or the I (especially with QJ on the field) is such a deceptive play. They have to play the run, collapse to one side, while Rodgers rolls out to the other.

Mixing it up is the key. Doing everything out of every package.

zombieslayer
Registered

14 years ago

#59

Bah. You guys are too nice. You are NICE guys.

Those were wasted downs. We should have passed more so we could have gotten 40+ pts. 31-3? That's being too gentle. Running wasted valuable clock time that should have gone to Greg Jennings. Also, Rodgers never had 5 TD passes in a game. WTF? We could have easily broke the 5 barrier.

Plus, what's with having Flynn back there throwing one freaking pass the whole game? Throw the damn ball. Heck, I could have handed the ball off. Put me in there if you're just going to have Flynn hand the ball off. My word.

Nice guys. Geez.

And +1 to Warhawk. You either got guys who are good at blocking for the run or good at blocking for the pass. Not both. I'd rather have the latter.

My man Donald Driver

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷

macbob
Veteran Member

14 years ago

#60

Uh oh. We only had 91 total rushing yards, with 26 of those total yards by our QBs. We must have lost to the Vikings this week.

"zombieslayer" wrote:

Zombie-that was about as perfect a balanced offense as you could have. Our pass/run ratio in the game was 54-46%, same as the Superbowl winners over the last 10 years and the 49ers when they were dominant for 20 years, as discussed earlier in this thread.

A balanced offense to keep the defense from teeing off on your QB play after play. Obviously, anyone advocating for a higher percentages of passes really needs to rethink their rationale. This isn't Madden, afterall.

:horse:

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

beast (6h) : What is he supposed to say? He doesn't want players currently on the team?

Martha Careful (10h) : meh

Zero2Cool (14h) : Sounds like Walker and Wyatt will be with Packers for beyond 2026

Zero2Cool (14h) : It's so awesome.

Zero2Cool (14h) : new site fan shout post fast

wpr (18h) : Slow posting in Fan shout.

wpr (18h) : Only 4

Zero2Cool (20h) : If only we had a topic to read about and discuss it. That's something new website must have!!!

dfosterf (21h) : Justice Musqueda over at Acme Packing put up an excellent synopsis of the Packers 1st round options this am

wpr (19-Apr) : 5 days

beast (18-Apr) : 6 days

wpr (17-Apr) : 7 days

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : sounds like Packers don't get good compensation, Jaire staying

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Nobody coming up with a keep, but at x amount

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Trade, cut or keep

dfosterf (16-Apr) : that from Jaire

dfosterf (16-Apr) : My guess is the Packers floated the concept of a reworked contract via his agent and agent got a f'

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Yes, and that is why I think Rob worded it how he did. Rather than say "agent"

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Same laws apply. Agent must present such an offer to Jaire. Cannot accept or reject without presenting it

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : I'm thinking that is why Rob worded it how he did.

dfosterf (16-Apr) : The Packers can certainly still make the offer to the agent

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Laws of agency and definition of fiduciary responsibility

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Jaire is open to a reduced contract without Jaire's permission

dfosterf (16-Apr) : The agent would arguably violate the law if he were to tell the Packers

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : That someone ... likely the agent.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : So, Jaire has not been offered nor rejected a pay reduction, but someone says he'd decline.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovksy says t was direct communication with someone familiar with Jaire’s line of thinking at that moment.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovsky just replied to me a bit ago. Jaire hasn't said it.

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Of course, that depends on the definition of "we"

dfosterf (16-Apr) : We have been told that they haven't because he wouldn't accept it. I submit we don't know that

dfosterf (16-Apr) : What is the downside in making a calculated reduced offer to Jaire?

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers are receiving interest in Jaire Alexander but a trade is not imminent

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Jalen Ramsey wants to be traded. He's never happy is he?

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : two 1sts in 2022 and two 2nd's in 2023 and 2024

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers had fortunate last three drafts.

dfosterf (15-Apr) : I may have to move

dfosterf (15-Apr) : My wife just told the ancient Japanese sushi dude not enough rice under his fish

Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I think a dozen is what I need

dfosterf (14-Apr) : Go fund me for this purpose just might work. A dozen nurses show up at 1265 to provide mental health assistance.

dfosterf (14-Apr) : Maybe send a crew of Angels to the Packers draft room on draft day.

Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I am the Angel that gets visited.

dfosterf (14-Apr) : Visiting Angels has a pretty good reputation

Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : what

Martha Careful (14-Apr) : WINNING IT, not someone else losing it. The best victory though was re-uniting with his wife

Martha Careful (14-Apr) : The manner in which he won it was just amazing and wonderful. First blowing the lead then getting back, then blowing it. But ultimately

Zero2Cool (12-Apr) : I'm guessing since the thumb was broken, he wasn't feeling it.

dfosterf (10-Apr) : Looking for guidance. Not feeling the thumb.

Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : If they knew about it or not

Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : I don't recall that he did which is why I asked.

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

34 - 0

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

25 - 27

Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM

BEARS

22 - 24