Do you know what the play calls actually were?

The majority of McCartheys plays are RUN/PASS options. The plays direction is in Rodgers hands a great deal.

He makes the read and decides to run or throw based on how he feels he can best exploit the D.

Our first drive against the 49ers we had 3 runs for 6 yards. The next 3 rushes produced 6 more.

Do you really think we could have beat them sticking with that running game?

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister 

McCarthey leaves that to the QB.

Specially Rodgers.

In post game PCs, McCarthey has said that he would have preferred to have run more, but he left it in Rodgers hands. That was a couple years ago.

I doubt he has suddenly started trusting Rodgers less and micro managing him more.

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister 

"I just think it's better when we have balance for everybody," Rodgers said during a Q&A with the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's Tyler Dunne, published Saturday. "It helps with the passing game. It slows down the rush. It gives us opportunities to have some more one-on-ones outside."

NFL.com wrote:

Rodgers said during his weekly radio show on WAUK-AM that the Packers can’t just throw the ball on every play, and so they’ve got to get more out of their running game than they had on Sunday, when they picked up 66 yards on 26 carries.

“Quantity is important – we want to have a certain amount of runs every game to keep them honest,” Rodgers said, via the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.

ProFootballTalk wrote:

“I think you just have to have at least a little bit of a threat at it,” Rodgers tolk Homer & Thunder of ESPN Milwaukee, “because we do a lot of play-action, movement game, where we’re breaking and rolling out or just play-action and throwing timing routes, and the defense has to respect it enough to suck up a little bit on the fake and give you some good throwing lanes. Sometimes you can do that by just having a big-name back in there and sometimes you need to be effective doing it. We’re going to have to prove that we can run the ball.”

ProFootballTalk wrote:

Big chunks are useless. You don't need big numbers. You need consistent production. Just like Passer rating vs Passing yards. Yards don't win, efficient passing does.

The 50+ yard runs don't win games. When you need 3 yards and the D knows you are going to run, you have to be able to get it.

Getting 2 yards a carry for 18 carries and with a couple 60 yard carries mixed in, you get a great average, but you were completely useless for 90% of the game. Which means you will get a lot of 3 and outs and fail to score.

If it is 3rd and 4 and you're going to get 2 yards 90% of the time, you can't depend on that running game.

Similar to what? To when we didn't have any RBs?

Or when we were top 5 in attempts and Harris put up 4.6 per?

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister 

You missed the point entirely. That's why I used the phrase "pounding the rock," or whatever the cliche' Gruden used to use. Yeah, 10 carries might only average 2 yards, but if a team sticks with it, they're likely to get many carries that are much better. Such as 3, 4, 5, or perhaps even 20+ yard carries. It's obviously never going to be a guarantee that a team can pick up a few yards when needed, even a great running team. But patient must be maintained because it's very likely holes will open up eventually, especially with a talented RB like Lacy, Franklin, and maybe Harris. There's absolutely no reason the Packers should average 2.0 yards a carry next season, even against teams like the 49'ers. I just hope if they are averaging that after a handful of carries, they don't abandon the run game in critical moments. I don't really care about the overall running stats or number attempts. I care more about the play-calling at critical moments in games, which McCarthy/Rodgers sometimes get away from running at all after they fall behind.

Besides, you say 90% of the game based on my example, but I hardly think roughly 15 plays (at 2 ypc) is "90%" of the game. Swoosh, over the head. I was only talking about running plays, thereby excluding all passing plays, which should be the majority of the Packers play-calls. I'm OK with a handful or two of 2 yards per carry, so long as the Packers can break a few longer runs of 5+ yards. Enough of those will make the defense respect the run at least a little, which will open other things up for the passing game. However, if the patience isn't maintained, even if not having much success, Rodgers is going to continue to be under pressure and it's going to be harder to pass.

Roughly a 4.5+ yards per carry average should be a gimme with this team, considering the type of coverage the Packers receive. Defense sell out and play coverage. A lot of teams beg the Packers to run, because they know they won't have the patience to beat them that way. McCarthy and Rodgers seem to itch BADLY to pass the ball, which I get. However, if a defense is begging them to run, then take it!! To their credit, they did a better job of that late last season, but I personally have to see more consistency than the past multiple seasons to believe that's going to be the case going forward. It seems we have better talent at the running back position now, but what happens if Lacy and/or Franklin are injured for a couple of weeks? It's likely to happen. Will things go right back to running draws out of shotgun formations every once and awhile with little success, and then abandon the run completely? I hope not. As great as Rodgers is, that's what opposing defense are hoping to receive, because the Packers haven't shown they will beat many teams any other way.

Originally Posted by: doddpower 

You missed the point entirely. That's why I used the phrase "pounding the rock," or whatever the cliche' Gruden used to use. Yeah, 10 carries might only average 2 yards, but if a team sticks with it, they're likely to get many carries that are much better. Such as 3, 4, 5, or perhaps even 20+ yard carries. It's obviously never going to be a guarantee that a team can pick up a few yards when needed, even a great running team. But patient must be maintained because it's very likely holes will open up eventually, especially with a talented RB like Lacy, Franklin, and maybe Harris. There's absolutely no reason the Packers should average 2.0 yards a carry next season, even against teams like the 49'ers. I just hope if they are averaging that after a handful of carries, they don't abandon the run game in critical moments. I don't really care about the overall running stats or number attempts. I care more about the play-calling at critical moments in games, which McCarthy/Rodgers sometimes get away from running at all after they fall behind.

Besides, you say 90% of the game based on my example, but I hardly think roughly 15 plays (at 2 ypc) is "90%" of the game. Swoosh, over the head. I was only talking about running plays, thereby excluding all passing plays, which should be the majority of the Packers play-calls. I'm OK with a handful or two of 2 yards per carry, so long as the Packers can break a few longer runs of 5+ yards. Enough of those will make the defense respect the run at least a little, which will open other things up for the passing game. However, if the patience isn't maintained, even if not having much success, Rodgers is going to continue to be under pressure and it's going to be harder to pass.

Originally Posted by: doddpower 

Roughly a 4.5+ yards per carry average should be a gimme with this team, considering the type of coverage the Packers receive. Defense sell out and play coverage. A lot of teams beg the Packers to run, because they know they won't have the patience to beat them that way. McCarthy and Rodgers seem to itch BADLY to pass the ball, which I get. However, if a defense is begging them to run, then take it!! To their credit, they did a better job of that late last season, but I personally have to see more consistency than the past multiple seasons to believe that's going to be the case going forward. It seems we have better talent at the running back position now, but what happens if Lacy and/or Franklin are injured for a couple of weeks? It's likely to happen. Will things go right back to running draws out of shotgun formations every once and awhile with little success, and then abandon the run completely? I hope not. As great as Rodgers is, that's what opposing defense are hoping to receive, because the Packers haven't shown they will beat many teams any other way.

Originally Posted by: doddpower 

That's funny, because Aaron Rodgers has come out repeatedly saying we need to run more. Here's a few quotes from 2013 and 2012 interviews:







Perhaps he needs to talk to himself about his play calling...

Originally Posted by: macbob 

If you need 3 yards and 90% of the time you run, you only get 2, it would be stupid to run on 3rd and 3. Because 90% of the time (That you try to run for 3+ yards) you would fail.

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister 

Kind of like when they had Harris running. 4.6 per and were top 5 in attempts.

They could run, so they did. Unlike earlier when they wanted too but couldn't.

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister 

But that's kind of silly. How often did the Packers actually average only 2.0 yards per carry? I really don't know, but I doubt it happened very often.

Originally Posted by: doddpower 

As I said in my previous post, overall running stats are great, but I care more about game management and when certain plays are called. If I recall correctly, the running game was working pretty good against the 49'ers in the playoffs, but after the Packers got behind, the run game largely became a non-factor. That goes back to my larger point in that the Packers play calling lacks patient and confidence when it's needed most, imo. Obtaining a certain number of carries a game or being top 5 in attempts is great, but the timing of the attempts is key to me, and that could definitely be improved upon, despite the statistics, which never tell the whole story. I can understand the desire to pass every play when behind, but there's no way that's going to win the game against a defense and offense like the 49'ers last year in the playoffs, and others we'll face this season. Be patient, and at least keep the game close to have a shot at the end.

Originally Posted by: doddpower