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
dfosterf (4h) : It's my one day deal complaint dept. on shareholder meeting day
dfosterf (5h) : Probably a homer access credential intimidation kinda thing
dfosterf (5h) : Meathead "journalists" skip this, concentrating on operational revenue when convenient. They switch when net revenue is more favorable.
dfosterf (5h) : Resulting in an actual drop of net revenue of 12.5%. She is from Minnesota. Just sayin'
dfosterf (5h) : Any plans to hold Maureen Smith (CFO) accountable for a 95% drop in investment revenue?
Mucky Tundra (5h) : In your face, HBO!
Mucky Tundra (5h) : @ByRyanWood Mark Murphy: “A great source of pride of mine is that we were never on Hard Knocks.”
Mucky Tundra (6h) : *years
Mucky Tundra (6h) : @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 (6h) : *cafeteria* I have hit my head also, so I sympathize
dfosterf (6h) : Possibly hit his head leaning into the glass protecting the food in the cafateria
dfosterf (6h) : Maybe a low flying drone
dfosterf (6h) : Did Savion Williams run into a goalpost or something?
Mucky Tundra (6h) : also, no bueno when a guy starts getting concussions right off the bat in his career
Zero2Cool (7h) : Concussion is worse. Banks probably vet off day via back booboo claim
Mucky Tundra (9h) : @AndyHermanNFL Jordy Nelson out at camp today. No word if he’s in play for one of the two open roster spots ; )
dfosterf (9h) : Is that better or worse than Banks bad back?
Zero2Cool (10h) : 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?
Mucky Tundra (24-Jul) : Bad week for people whose names are alliterations
Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : Hulk Hogan gone too.
Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : Oh, it's toe injury
Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : Hope it's not serious. that would stink
dfosterf (24-Jul) : Sounds like an ankle not a knee for Fields
dfosterf (24-Jul) : Ya Flaccp on Browns
Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : Maybe Tyrod Taylor instead
Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : He's on Browns, right?
dfosterf (24-Jul) : They would probably go with Flacco is my guess if Fields out
dfosterf (24-Jul) : Fleece 'em again!
Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : Malik Willis might be someone Jets come after
packerfanoutwest (24-Jul) : Packers introduce 1923-inspired classic uniform, leather-look helmet
Zero2Cool (23-Jul) : Both LB Quay Walker and Rookie DB Micah Robinson have passed their physicals
Zero2Cool (23-Jul) : Happy to see site feels more snappy snappy
Zero2Cool (23-Jul) : No sir. I did not.
dfosterf (23-Jul) : You didn't get free childcare when you were at work?
wpr (23-Jul) : These guys make hundreds of thousands of dollars a year. Pay for their own childcare.
dfosterf (23-Jul) : 2nd issue. Number 1 issue was no gameday childcare. 1 of 3 teams not providing it
Zero2Cool (23-Jul) : Suppose if locker room is main issue, we sitting pretty
wpr (23-Jul) : I thought so Mucky. In those useless player polls GB always rates high overall. Locker is a part of it.
Mucky Tundra (23-Jul) : Wasn't the locker room just updated like 6 or 7 years ago?
Zero2Cool (23-Jul) : I have forum updated on different site. We'll see how this one goes before going to that
Zero2Cool (23-Jul) : Elgton Jenkins has a back injury, is expect to end contract dispute
wpr (23-Jul) : It's funny the PA complained about the locker room. It wasn't that long ago it was top shelf. Things change in a hurry.
wpr (23-Jul) : The site is much more better.
Zero2Cool (23-Jul) : NFLPA report said Packers lockerroom needed upgrade. Whining bout where you change?
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
5h / Around The NFL / Mucky Tundra

6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

13h / Green Bay Packers Talk / TheKanataThrilla

16h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

21h / 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

22-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

20-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

20-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

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