Nonstopdrivel
16 years ago
I hate prevent offenses even more than I hate prevent defenses.
UserPostedImage
djcubez
16 years ago

I myself am hoping we have used up all our bad luck this season, and will tear up the league next year.
With our lousy year, we should have a pretty easy schedule next season.

"Cheesey" wrote:


Anyone know what divisions we get? Being in third place we play every third place team in the NFC which is right now, Seattle, Tampa Bay and the Eagles. Not exactly easy.
all_about_da_packers
16 years ago


They dominated the TOP (at least first half) and picked up a ton of first downs.

Offensive showcases don't just come in the form of 35-7 blow-outs.

"dd80forever" wrote:



33:43 to 26:17. Not exactly a huge difference. It's the Bears for god's sake. I would be surprised if they EVER held the TOP advantage.

"all_about_da_packers" wrote:




They dominated the TOP IN THE FIRST HALF!

Something like 20:00 - 10:00.

That's call domination. They didn't sustain it. But the Packers dominated the Bears for 45 minutes in the game, and they dominated the TOP in the first half.
The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.
dd80forever
16 years ago

They didn't sustain it.

"all_about_da_packers" wrote:


blank
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
16 years ago

If Crosby had made that kick, would everyone still be questioning McCarthy's decision to run 3 straight times at the end?

"djcubez" wrote:



I absolutely would have.

"wpr" wrote:




That'd be your right, but his decision would've led us to a win.

At the end of the day, as Holmgren would say you have to take the sure points each and every time.

Mike McCarthy was doing that, well at least a FG is surer than attempting to throw for a TD.

We're not talking about a 50+ yarder or something, we're talking about a FG around 35 yards. That's very makable.

"all_about_da_packers" wrote:



Crosby has shown all year long that there is no such thing as a sure FG.
Keep in mind I am not asking for GB to try to pass on a TD on any one particular play. I am asking them to try and move the sticks by passing the ball. I am not saying to pass every single down either. But a 35 yard kick in sub zero weather is anything from a sure kick even if the ball is not blocked.
The coach can not say that he isn't going to call a pass because it might be intercepted. They could say we don't want to run the ball because it might be fumbled just as easily.
As long a they had the time and the field position they could call any play. pass on 1st down and get 4 yards and run on 2nd down. Pass again on 3rd down. Rodgers has shown that he completes a high % of his passes. If the receiver breaks a tackle he is going to get a 1st down or more. A run up the middle with 8-9 guys in the box is most likely going to get 3-4 yards if you are lucky. And we have seen all year that GB is not a good running team.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:


I don't understand then. You pass but you don't do it to get a TD? If you're going to get a FG run out as much clock as you can first. Why pass and give the Bears time only to get a FG?

"djcubez" wrote:



Others were implying that if GB was not running the ball in order to wind the clock down and then go for a FG that ment that they HAD to be trying to throw the ball into the end zone for a TD on nearly every single play.
I was saying that they needed to run the same kind of passing plays that they had been doing and succeeding with all game long. Short passes off of play action. Screens and down and outs. Passes that we 6-10 yards down field. Mix them up a little and not play right into the strenght of the Bears defense. If they kept moving tha ball down field they would have eventually gotten the TD. If not kick the ball from the when the line of scrimage is the 3 instead of the 20. It may have made a difference.
I want to see a coach and team that tries for TDs 1st and FG only after they run out of options. This team, This coach tries to get FGs 1st and if they luck out and get a TD well so be it.
UserPostedImage
all_about_da_packers
16 years ago

Do you realize you just called me a liar?

"wpr" wrote:



Whoa, really bad choice of words to start my post you quoted.

What I meant to refer to, with the "I don't think so" bit is the part where you said: "Even if they kick the FG if they run the ball 3 times it is still poor play calling."

I don't think so, with regards to that. It'd be completely idiotic (and out of character for me) to call you a liar when you say you would do something regardless. Didn't mean to imply that at all. Sorry.
The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.
Nonstopdrivel
16 years ago
This is exactly what I've been advocating as well. I don't understand why everyone assumes that when we say "Go for the TD," we mean toss the ball into the end zone on every play. All we're saying is make a concerted effort to keep moving toward the end zone, instead of deliberately stalling to kill time and kick a field goal.

If you happen not to get it into the end zone on third down, so be it -- you kick the field goal. But at least you TRIED to put it out of reach. And you've killed time off the clock to boot.
UserPostedImage
djcubez
16 years ago

If Crosby had made that kick, would everyone still be questioning McCarthy's decision to run 3 straight times at the end?

"wpr" wrote:



I absolutely would have.

"djcubez" wrote:




That'd be your right, but his decision would've led us to a win.

At the end of the day, as Holmgren would say you have to take the sure points each and every time.

Mike McCarthy was doing that, well at least a FG is surer than attempting to throw for a TD.

We're not talking about a 50+ yarder or something, we're talking about a FG around 35 yards. That's very makable.

"wpr" wrote:



Crosby has shown all year long that there is no such thing as a sure FG.
Keep in mind I am not asking for GB to try to pass on a TD on any one particular play. I am asking them to try and move the sticks by passing the ball. I am not saying to pass every single down either. But a 35 yard kick in sub zero weather is anything from a sure kick even if the ball is not blocked.
The coach can not say that he isn't going to call a pass because it might be intercepted. They could say we don't want to run the ball because it might be fumbled just as easily.
As long a they had the time and the field position they could call any play. pass on 1st down and get 4 yards and run on 2nd down. Pass again on 3rd down. Rodgers has shown that he completes a high % of his passes. If the receiver breaks a tackle he is going to get a 1st down or more. A run up the middle with 8-9 guys in the box is most likely going to get 3-4 yards if you are lucky. And we have seen all year that GB is not a good running team.

"all_about_da_packers" wrote:


I don't understand then. You pass but you don't do it to get a TD? If you're going to get a FG run out as much clock as you can first. Why pass and give the Bears time only to get a FG?

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:



Others were implying that if GB was not running the ball in order to wind the clock down and then go for a FG that ment that they HAD to be trying to throw the ball into the end zone for a TD on nearly every single play.
I was saying that they needed to run the same kind of passing plays that they had been doing and succeeding with all game long. Short passes off of play action. Screens and down and outs. Passes that we 6-10 yards down field. Mix them up a little and not play right into the strenght of the Bears defense. If they kept moving tha ball down field they would have eventually gotten the TD. If not kick the ball from the when the line of scrimage is the 3 instead of the 20. It may have made a difference.
I want to see a coach and team that tries for TDs 1st and FG only after they run out of options. This team, This coach tries to get FGs 1st and if they luck out and get a TD well so be it.

"djcubez" wrote:



+1. Despite my disagreement, I know you and drivel had been saying it all along, but if we had gotten that extra first, not only would the field goal have been closer and easier but we could run the clock down to 3 seconds if we needed. There's no reason to break off from what's worked the entire game. I mean, even if they DO run 3 straight times, why go directly up the middle for no gain every time? At least be a little creative and try to gain extra yards with maybe a misdirection or draw.
djcubez
16 years ago

This is exactly what I've been advocating as well. I don't understand why everyone assumes that when we say "Go for the TD," we mean toss the ball into the end zone on every play. All we're saying is make a concerted effort to keep moving toward the end zone, instead of deliberately stalling to kill time and kick a field goal.

If you happen not to get it into the end zone on third down, so be it -- you kick the field goal. But at least you TRIED to put it out of reach. And you've killed time off the clock to boot.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:


That's exactly spot on. I've seen this scenario so many times.

1. We get the ball and we throw a pass for maybe 3-5 yards. Second down we throw for the first.

2. Another first and ten but this time we run it. Loss of 2. So on 2nd and 12 we do the obvious and pass, but Rodger's gets sacked/throws an incompletion/throws it away. 3rd and 12 we do a run or dump off pass. Fourth down we punt.

Stubborness. It's costing us so much. If only we could call plays a little more aggressive. I believe Rodger's playing style as a QB is much more aggressive than his coaches, and they're not using it to their advantage.
all_about_da_packers
16 years ago

This is exactly what I've been advocating as well. I don't understand why everyone assumes that when we say "Go for the TD," we mean toss the ball into the end zone on every play. .

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:



Well that clears things up.

I honestly didn't have a problem with MM's play calling, but I can see your point.

I've always said it's so easy to criticize the play calling when players don't execute, but you and wpr do make a valid point.

I don't know, I guess because we were well within Crosby's range + the INT's Aaron has thrown late in games (note: not saying they were all his fault) I can't blame MM for sticking with the run and playing it a little safe.

If I worry about the players losing confidence with this losing streak, it's only fair to wonder whether MM has gone into his shell, so to speak, with regards to play calling.

I'd have said no, but having your point cleared up... it's an interesting question to ponder.
The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (3h) : The menu you expanded to log in, it's the first icon under "PackersHome" .. maybe i should add text to it
dfosterf (3h) : Feelin' pfowish can't find the sun. No big deal, will drag a laptop out when the time comes
Zero2Cool (3h) : if you're on mobile, open the menu and its the "sun" icon
dfosterf (3h) : Can't find the toggle, lol
dfosterf (3h) : I can find that the Microsoft lady rep for Titletown Tech is the philanthropy boss for the entire Microsoft corporation, but. .
Zero2Cool (4h) : There's a toggle for light/dark theme. Super easy.
dfosterf (4h) : The white background beta was hard to read, especially the quotes
dfosterf (4h) : Hopefully the color scheme remains the same
dfosterf (4h) : *Friday*
dfosterf (4h) : 100 million would be 539 million as of Fridsy
dfosterf (4h) : Heck, they could have taken a hundred milliion and invested in DAVE inc. last year (semi random, humor, but real)
dfosterf (5h) : Beer brat and ticket is where the money comes from
dfosterf (5h) : The 40th is Titletown Tech itself. This is a pet project of both Ed Policy and Mark Murphy
Zero2Cool (5h) : New site coming along nicely. The editor is better than what we have here. Oh yeah!
dfosterf (5h) : No profit that I know of. 0 for 40
dfosterf (5h) : The woke reference has to do with the makeup and oftentimes objectives of the companies they invested in
packerfanoutwest (5h) : beer and brats woke? say whom?
beast (5h) : I don't want to get into politics, but how is, beers and brats considered to be "woke"? Food is food...
beast (5h) : That being said, I'm not saying all 100% should be that way, but not surprised if majority are Wisconsin based
beast (5h) : And if everyone has heard of them, then it it probably has less growth potential and less community based
beast (5h) : Well isn't the investing person supposed to invest the money?
dfosterf (6h) : I swear if I were to discover that one of them has invented a virtue signalling transmitter I will not be surprised, lol
dfosterf (6h) : 39 companies so far that I bet no one has ever heard of.
dfosterf (6h) : -Not saying woke, but should- borderline philanthopist venture capital excercise
dfosterf (6h) : Well for one, they are pouring resources into Title Town Tech. Investing beer, brat, hot dog, ticket money into what is pretty much...
beast (12h) : Wow, 95% drop in investment revenue? Would be interesting to hear the details of why...
dfosterf (25-Jul) : It's my one day deal complaint dept. on shareholder meeting day
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Probably a homer access credential intimidation kinda thing
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Meathead "journalists" skip this, concentrating on operational revenue when convenient. They switch when net revenue is more favorable.
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Resulting in an actual drop of net revenue of 12.5%. She is from Minnesota. Just sayin'
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Any plans to hold Maureen Smith (CFO) accountable for a 95% drop in investment revenue?
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : In your face, HBO!
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : @ByRyanWood Mark Murphy: “A great source of pride of mine is that we were never on Hard Knocks.”
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : *years
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : @mattschneidman Mark Murphy says he anticipates “many Packers games” being played in Germany, Ireland and/or the U.K. over the next 5-10 yea
dfosterf (25-Jul) : *cafeteria* I have hit my head also, so I sympathize
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Possibly hit his head leaning into the glass protecting the food in the cafateria
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Maybe a low flying drone
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Did Savion Williams run into a goalpost or something?
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : also, no bueno when a guy starts getting concussions right off the bat in his career
Zero2Cool (25-Jul) : Concussion is worse. Banks probably vet off day via back booboo claim
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : @AndyHermanNFL Jordy Nelson out at camp today. No word if he’s in play for one of the two open roster spots ; )
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Is that better or worse than Banks bad back?
Zero2Cool (25-Jul) : Savion concussion ... not good.
packerfanoutwest (24-Jul) : Aaron Rodgers’s first pass of first team period was picked off
Mucky Tundra (24-Jul) : tbh I didn't hear of his passing
Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : Cosby Show. Malcom Jamal Warner I think is real name
Mucky Tundra (24-Jul) : I was thinking of Ozzy and Hulk
Mucky Tundra (24-Jul) : Who's Theo?
Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : How is Theo alliteration?
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2025 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM
COMMANDERS
Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM
Browns
Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM
Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM
Cardinals
Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM
PANTHERS
Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM
EAGLES
Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM
Giants
Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM
Bears
Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM
RAVENS
Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM
Vikings
Recent Topics
4h / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Zero2Cool

5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

12h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

25-Jul / Around The NFL / Mucky Tundra

25-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

25-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / TheKanataThrilla

25-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

25-Jul / Around The NFL / beast

24-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

24-Jul / Around The NFL / beast

24-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

23-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

23-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

22-Jul / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

22-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

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