Not sure if I've seen this sequence talked about but it jut sort of struck me as indicative of the Packers season so far. At the end of the 1st quarter in the Bears game. Its 4th and goal from the one. The packers line up as if they are going to go for the TD rather than kick a field goal (no problem with that aggressive stance so far) We try to draw them offsides (not sure what a half a yard will do but OK, I get it) they don't jump so we call a timeout. Then we come in and run a play that is stuffed. I'm perfectly OK with going for it but why bother trying to draw them offsides in the first place and why the hell would you waste the timeout only to come back with that play. They could have just as easily had the running play called and rather than have Rodgers call a timeout just snap the damn ball at 1 second and run the play. If anything you are going to be at an advantage to snap the ball because the defense has figured out that you are trying to draw them off and may be anticipating the TO. If you snap the ball you just might catch them with a split second of hesitation off the ball since they are really making an effort not to jump. That may not be the case but I can't see any advantage at all to call the timeout especially since it seemed pretty clear that they were not going to kick the FG. I suppose its possible that Mike McCarthy was planning on kicking and changed his mind but in that case, again, why try to draw them off. The penalty was not going to give you a fresh set of down. IMO it was a total waste of a timeout. It didn't matter in the grand scheme of things but it just seems to me to be indicative of the little things that have been going wrong. Rodgers seems to have very little regard for timeouts He either doesn't see them as important or doesn't realize that they are not unlimited.

Like I said, it wasn't a big deal but it was so unnecessary. I just thought it was really quite a stupid thing to do.

Originally Posted by: sschind 

You didn't even mention the dumbest thing about that whole sequence which was on the run they used Jeff Janis as a lead blocker out of the backfield when we have a perfectly good fullback.

Originally Posted by: steveishere 

The GBP's offensive line has TNS when it comes to running the ball on short yardage situations. Spread the field with 4 wides put the quarterback in shotgun and he can read the defense.

It is completely arrogant of McCarthy to think his pass blocking offensive line is going to man up against goal line defense. Not only arrogant, but completely idiotic. I cringe every time.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 

I missed the play with Janis playing FB. Some thoughts I'm having on that are... it's be nice if they used Rip since they kept him on the roster... I'm not sure if he's not ready or if they just don't like using him, or trying to trick the defense or what. But the Packers are struggling at RB and TE right now, both are positions that a versatile FB might be able to help with... and other than when being forced to, they're not really using him.

But one thing to note, maybe Janis best offensive regular season play came blocking a DB all the way down field to get Starks a touchdown last year (Chargers?) game. I like being creative if they think doing something will be advantage, maybe they believed it would keep the defense off guard? Though, I kind of want to see Janis on a 5 yard deep cross pattern, start on the outside and go up the field for 5 yards then go across the field at full speed... can the CB/LB keep up with that speed? A 5 yard catch should turn into more than 10 yards (I think) and few a few good blocks or missed tackles it could go much longer.



Yeah I thought that was a huge problem in the Cowboys game... the Packers OL seemed to do a good job at controlling the line ... but every time the Packers wanted to go short yardage, Mike McCarthy would stack the backfield with two FBs or some other crazy combo which allowed the Cowboys to focus in the backfield and stack their box.

Packers had a lot more success spreading the Cowboys defense out... and I think even in short yardages, they should have kept the defensive spread out so they couldn't stack the box, giving the OL a better chance of finding a match-up they liked and giving who ever is running more space to work with to get around a defender.

Originally Posted by: beast 

They just put their "versatile" FB on IR.

If Janis is on the field in that situation, it should be either for a slant or a jump ball scenario.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 

Who did they just put on IR? You talking about Lacy? or did they put Rip on IR?

Or if you surprise out of that, use Janis like Marcel Reece as a WR out of the backfield for a handful of plays... though they could just hire Reece I think...

Originally Posted by: beast