Do We Need New Blood on Offense?· Page 2

Stevetarded
Registered

16 years ago

The problem with our offense when it comes to settling for 3 is the red zone rushing. We couldn't punch the ball in the endzone nomatter who was carrying it. I would like to see some statistics of how many 0 or negative yard runs we had in the red zone this year because it was bad. To win those 7 games by scoring TD's Rodgers would have basically had to end the season with around 35 passing TD's, I think that is quite a bit to ask.

"zombieslayer" wrote:

A few months ago, someone posted Aaron Rodgers 's red zone stats and they were off the charts. Taking a look at those stats, I was thinking "why the **** are we not putting the ball in Aaron's hands when we're in the RZ?"

So if the run isn't working in the RZ, screw it. Throw it in. Aaron doesn't turn the ball over. We have the receiving corps to do it. Donald Driver is The Man at 4 yard receptions. Let's utilize our strengths.

I don't think Mike McCarthy was aggressive in the RZ enough in '08.

"Stevetarded" wrote:

I would prefer they use the offseason to improve our problems than just hope to work around them next year. Which would mean making it so we can hopefully run the ball in the RZ next season instead of just calling more pass plays.

blank

warhawk
Senior Member

16 years ago

#12

One of the reasons is that he still has yet to feel the rush. Granted, half of this is the offensive line's fault, but Rodgers hasn't really "made" plays. It's the receivers doing the work.

"MassPackersFan" wrote:

Eh I'd have to disagree. There were a pretty large number of times where Rodgers scrambled and made something happen when nothing was there - Far more often than I expected out of a first year starter. Do we forget the jump pass or the magic behind the back TD pass so quickly?

On offense, I'm fine with most everything. I'd like to see Brandon Jackson get more carries. I would like to see us try to transition towards the post-Clifton era (as much as that will suck). Give me a balanced offense with a healthy dose of play-action and I'm happy.

"blueleopard" wrote:

I also recall several beautifully thrown long balls that could not have been set in the hands of the receivers any better. There is no way you throw for that many yards and it's all on the receivers. For every great catch I saw a great throw. I couldn't take away anything from either side.

"The train is leaving the station."

zombieslayer
Registered

16 years ago

#13

"warhawk" wrote:

Being anal, I think they could have been slightly better.

Rodgers hit the WR in his hands but didn't lead him, so as soon as the catch was made, the WR was tackled. Favre in '07 was able to hit the WR in stride so after the catch was made, he was at full speed and could turn the 50 yard completion to a 72 yard TD.

(now, not at all implying I'd rather have Favre as our QB. I'd take '09 Rodgers over '09 Favre. I'm just saying those throws COULD be better).

My man Donald Driver

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

MassPackersFan
Member

16 years ago

#14

Sometimes. There were at least two bombs to Jennings last year that were WELL underthrown, that he still took to the house (Oakland and ermm... that other one where the D blitzed and Jennings was wide open).

The Denver and KC games truly overshadow those instances though.

DakotaT
Select Member

16 years ago

#15

When this offense can consistently pick up a 3 and 2 running the ball on a good defense, then it has arrived. Until we can pick up the first down on those tough situations, we continue to be a work in progress.

That said we are still a very good offense, but we lack the testicles to smash mouth when called upon. I appreciate the quaterback sneaks we now do, but I cringe evertime it's third and short and I see the handoff.

Cheesey
Preferred Member

16 years ago

#16

Let me clarify. I think we're fine with the offensive players we've got (with the possible exception, as zombieslayer said, of our O-Line).

I was talking about coaching. If we'd had a more aggressive OC, one that went for the throat instead of protecting a lead, I think we would have won a lot more games.

Do we, in your opinion, need a real offensive coordinator?

"Since69" wrote:

I agree......way too conservative on play calling. I think it was Zombie that was saying that all along, and i didn't agree at first, but as the season wore on he had me convinced he was right.
You have to play to WIN, not to not lose. Keep doing what got you the lead so that the other team can't get back in the game.
Get an OC that puts his foot on the opponent's throat once we have them down.
You will win more games with that attack then to sit back on your 3 point lead.

Rios39
Member

16 years ago

#17

"zombieslayer" wrote:

"warhawk" wrote:

Rodgers throws the ball more like Brady. He'll try to find one on one coverage and then throw the deep balls. A lot of time Favre has the play set in his hand like the OT game in Denver, the ball was in the air right off the hut. There was a few throws like that from Rodgers. But mostly you could see him look left, look right, look under then see one on one deep and throw it up.

There's pros and cons to both, The Pros for the Rodgers side of it is that he's scanning through his progressions well and doesn't have his mind made up off snap no matter what the coverage. The Cons is what we are discussing. The Pros to what Favre did last year was that if the coverage was off then it's easy TD. But then when he did it other games you see the negative like the Cowboys game, that's a product of making your mind up before the snap.

blank

Rios39
Member

16 years ago

#18

The guy that said Rodgers needed to deliver more. Well it was mentioned he'd need to throw 7 more TD = 35 TD year. Plus he ran for 4 TD so that would be expecting your QB to account for 39-40 TD in order to win games. Uh UH. If Rodgers accounts for 40 TD and we have a top 10 defense, well we'd likely be playing football right now.

blank

zombieslayer
Registered

16 years ago

#19

"Cheesey" wrote:

+1.

You got 3 points there that I really like:
1) ALWAYS play to win, not play to not lose,
2) Put your foot down your opponent's throat once you have them down,
3) You will win more games with that attack then to sit back on your 3 point lead.

All 3 assumptions are 100% correct. When he's down, kick him again. Then kick him again. Then kick him again. Keep kicking him until the referee says there's no time on the clock.

Remember that game when Favre threw 6 TDs? Now, this is NOT anything Favre vs Rodgers, but it's everything Jets vs Packers playcalling. Favre threw 2 TDs on 4th down. Yes. They had the game wrapped up but stilll went for it on 4th down.

I like that. For the record, MM was doing that in '07. He seemed to stop doing it in '08. We get into the Red Zone, with a near perfect QB (Aaron's red zone stats are incredible), and MM calls run play after run play. Urgh!

My man Donald Driver

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

buckeyepackfan
Veteran Member

16 years ago

#20

I have been sayin it all year and getting bashed for it"I'm a hater"

MM plays not to lose the game instead of playing "to win the game!!!".

What do I know, I'm just a "Hater". :icon_smile: :icon_smile: :icon_smile: :icon_smile:

I was addicted to The Hokey Pokey, but I turned myself around!

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

packerfanoutwest (9h) : don't care

Zero2Cool (14h) : Lions shopping Jameson Williams?

packerfanoutwest (22h) : Packers General Manager Brian Gutekunst says Green Bay’s roster can win, even without adding anyone in the draft.

Zero2Cool (22h) : It's a poor design. New site has SignalR like our gameday chat

wpr (22h) : Ah today's Shout was very quick to post.

wpr (22h) : now 3

Zero2Cool (23h) : Who? What?

beast (22-Apr) : What is he supposed to say? He doesn't want players currently on the team?

Martha Careful (21-Apr) : meh

Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : Sounds like Walker and Wyatt will be with Packers for beyond 2026

Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : It's so awesome.

Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : new site fan shout post fast

wpr (21-Apr) : Slow posting in Fan shout.

wpr (21-Apr) : Only 4

Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : If only we had a topic to read about and discuss it. That's something new website must have!!!

dfosterf (21-Apr) : 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

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