Packers want to speed up offense· Page 2

DoddPower
Veteran Member

10 years ago

2013- Packers ran 66.8 plays/ game
2012- 64.7

In the last 2 years, no team has averaged 75 plays/ game. The Chip Kelly offense averaged only 65.4 last year.

Rather than overanalyze McCarthy's statement, I think he meant "Our goal is to have the ball on offense more than we did last year. My reasoning is that gives us more chances to score and leaves less chance for the opponent."

Now, feel free to analyze the attire he was wearing when giving the statement. Since it's the off season and there is no real news.

This news flash just in. ARod just completed an interview in Maine while on vacation. He said, and I quote,"Our goal is to win the Super Bowl." Wait. Where did that come from? What do you think he meant? Is it significant that he was not wearing a Packer t shirt when he said it? He was drinking a Lite beer. Does he think he's fat? News Flash- "ARod is trying to lose weight before the season. If he can't, they have no hope of Super Bowl title." (I should be a reporter...)

Off season stinks.

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan

When I read McCarthy's statement you quoted, it just makes me think the defense needs to get better. If the defense could get the opposing offenses off the field quickly on a routine basis, the offense would have the ball more. Theoretically, anyway. McCarthy is an offensive guy though.

DakotaT
Select Member

10 years ago

#12

Why in the hell would we want to speed things up when we have a smash mouth, old school, power running back? Man, i read some stupid shit in here once in a while. Now is the time to have a balanced offense and wear teams down, and most importantly have a rested defense.

StarrMax1
Registered

10 years ago

#13

From another angle,

Packers offense has 5 possesions, run 15 plays each possesion, that's 75 plays.

That would be where the Smash-mouth football would come in.

Probably wouldn't happen that way, but seems The Packers are striving to be a balanced team.

A team that could put together a 15 play drive, allowing the D to be fresh, but at any time Aaron and co. could light it up for a quick score.

That is more likely to happen if the opponent starts to play the run.

I didn't read it as MIke wanting to run a Chip Kelly style of offense, but a no huddle does put the defense in a whole if they can't make their subsitutions.

Nothing stopping the Packers from running the ball out of the no huddle.

Dexter_Sinister
Registered

10 years ago

#14

Originally Posted by: DakotaT

The Packers have had a positive TOP on offense every year McCarthey has been our head coach.

An increase in TOP has no impact on winning %. As TOP goes up, winning percentage stays exactly the same.

It is much more important to focus on being efficient with the ball than it is to work on keeping the ball longer.

It doesn't help to hold onto the ball a long time if you don't score with it. It doesn't hurt to score quickly.

I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.
Not screaming in terror like his passengers.

nerdmann
Premier Member

10 years ago

#15

This is only a good idea IF your defense is any good.

The benefit to running 75 plays is the speed at which you're running them will stop the opposing defense from making substitutions. You'll force them to use all their time outs or put them in a situation where what D they started with on 1st down is the one they'll have to play on 2nd and 3rd. I didn't read the article yet but I have to believe ths is why you would do such a thing.

I'm very surprised to read this is how we're approaching offense. Should make drafting Packers for fantasy football even easier.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

You can prevent the other team from substituting by going no-huddle. That doesn't mean you have to snap the ball right away.

And as a matter of fact, a little tempo might help do away with these goddam lulls we keep experiencing week after week.

“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”

nerdmann
Premier Member

10 years ago

#16

Originally Posted by: DakotaT

Maybe it's disinfo, like when Ron Wolf publicly stated he wanted to draft Rex Grossman. LOL

“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”

nerdmann
Premier Member

10 years ago

#17

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister

If we burned some clock against the Niners in week 1, they would have had 1/3 less plays, hence much less yardage and much fewer snaps.

Defenses play better when they're not worn down.

“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”

DoddPower
Veteran Member

10 years ago

#18

If we burned some clock against the Niners in week 1, they would have had 1/3 less plays, hence much less yardage and much fewer snaps.

Defenses play better when they're not worn down.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann

I'm sick of all the excuses for the defense. It's not the offenses job to make it easier on the defense. The defense needs to make stops regardless of what situation they are in. It's the offenses job to score points, nothing else. Anything beyond scoring points is a bonus. But the defense needs to step up and carry its weight regardless of offensive time of possession, or any other offensive factor.

mi_keys
Senior Member

10 years ago

#19

If we burned some clock against the Niners in week 1, they would have had 1/3 less plays, hence much less yardage and much fewer snaps.

Defenses play better when they're not worn down.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann

If we slow it down we have a 1/3 less plays, hence much less yardage and much fewer snaps. If you slow the game down, BOTH teams end up with fewer plays.

The offense should operate at the tempo at which it is most effective: i.e. most points per possession. If that's running the hurry up, run the hurry up. If that's grinding out a slow methodical game, do that. If the defense wants a rest, force a three and out.

Born and bred a cheesehead

DarkaneRules
Veteran Member

10 years ago

#20

Patriots run a very effective up tempo offense which I would want to emulate. You have to have a great QB to pull it off. We have a great QB. Let's do it!

Circular Arguments: They are a heck of an annoyance

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 (7h) : Sounds like no serious injuries from the Saints game and Jacobs and Watson should play in the Vikings game

packerfanoutwest (12h) : both games Watson missed, Packers won

Martha Careful (14h) : I hope all of you have a Merry Christmas!

Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol

buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier

buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol

Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Jacobs gonna be OK???

Zero2Cool (24-Dec) : Watson gonna be OK???

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I just checked. What tie breaker?

bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ahh, ok.

bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes due to tie breaker

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?

bboystyle (23-Dec) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network

beast (23-Dec) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th

beast (23-Dec) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.

bboystyle (23-Dec) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno

beast (23-Dec) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?

packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I see what you did there Mucky

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (23-Dec) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (23-Dec) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (23-Dec) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (23-Dec) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (23-Dec) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

beast (23-Dec) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I literally just said it.

packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't

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

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS