gbguy20
6 years ago
The line gets better the more it gets asked to do something as well. The stats you ask will tell you that the packers almost never run on 3rd and short or on 3rd down at all. In before you say they don't do it because they suck at it. One, you don't know that. And two, IF they do suck at it, maybe it is because they never do it.
BAD EMAIL because the address couldn ot be found, or is unable to receive mail.
KRK
  • KRK
  • Veteran Member
6 years ago
From and since the NFC Championship against SEA, we have sucked at it. I know that because I observe it

If it makes you feel better, in my idle moments, I will attempt to back up my assertion with evidence.
In Luce tua Videmus Lucem KRK
KRK
  • KRK
  • Veteran Member
6 years ago
Well that didn’t take long

https://www.packersnews.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/2018/11/23/examining-green-bay-packers-issues-third-down-and-possible-solution/2082749002/ 

But, the team has gotten worse at converting on third and short as the weeks have gone on.

In games 1-4, they converted 67 percent of their third downs needing six or fewer yards. In games 5-8, 52 percent. The last two weeks? Just 36 percent of the time they have converted.

“When you evaluate each and every week, it comes down to the obvious,” McCarthy said. “You just have to execute better.”

And this is where the personnel issues have been spotlighted.
In Luce tua Videmus Lucem KRK
gbguy20
6 years ago
We were talking about running the ball but thanks
BAD EMAIL because the address couldn ot be found, or is unable to receive mail.
Nonstopdrivel
6 years ago
How many of those failed third-down conversions were on account of Aaron Rodgers throwing the ball into the dirt or failing to look for in the direction of a wide-open running back or tossing the ball out of bounds?
UserPostedImage
beast
6 years ago

He has an offensive scheme that would tie the franchise together.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 

Again, you have shown absolutely nothing other than your willing to spin in circles to praise Edgar Bennett, without giving anything other verbal spin.

First, you say he's different, then you say he's continual the same... you're making him out to be Goldilocks more than an actual NFL coach.

You said he was being groomed and then got scrap goated, which I don't think you can prove especially since he wasn't scape goated, just asked to take a demotion... which is not the same thing, they wanted to keep Bennett, just didn't think he was the best fit for OC.

Your saying he's ready to take responsibility for his actions as head coach and then your the one using scape goats as to why he shouldn't be held responsible... you are talking in complete circles and not making any sense.

He ignored your question because he has no idea. His comments are based on nothing aside from his belief that he has no evidence for. He just decided it one day and keeps bringing it up as if its fact.

Originally Posted by: gbguy20 


That seem to be the case as he's taking both side of the same issue and just being pro-Bennett with it and using Mike McCarthy as a scape goat.
UserPostedImage
nerdmann
6 years ago

Again, you have shown absolutely nothing other than your willing to spin in circles to praise Edgar Bennett, without giving anything other verbal spin.

First, you say he's different, then you say he's continual the same... you're making him out to be Goldilocks more than an actual NFL coach.

You said he was being groomed and then got scrap goated, which I don't think you can prove especially since he wasn't scape goated, just asked to take a demotion... which is not the same thing, they wanted to keep Bennett, just didn't think he was the best fit for OC.

Your saying he's ready to take responsibility for his actions as head coach and then your the one using scape goats as to why he shouldn't be held responsible... you are talking in complete circles and not making any sense.


That seem to be the case as he's taking both side of the same issue and just being pro-Bennett with it and using Mike McCarthy as a scape goat.

Originally Posted by: beast 



You're arguing my point, if you say he was merely "demoted."

Again, I'm not saying he is both different and the same. Go back and read what I said. He KNOWS the team. He would not require a rebuild. Then again, maybe he would want to shitcan everybody and start over, dunno.

Aaron Rodgers is still here. THAT is the same. Mike McCarthy is gone. THAT is different. My hypothesis is that Aaron Rodgers wants to "do his thing." Mike McCarthy is no longer "standing in his way" of winning championships. He does not want to bring someone in who will change the system and requite 2-3 years to turn personell over to fit a new system. Bennett fits that bill. He knows the team. He knows the system.

It's not a question of Bennett CHANGING anything. The impediment (Mike McCarthy) has been removed. The change has already taken place. Now do you just let Aaron go out there and win championships, or do you bring someone in that will ALSO impede Aaron for the next couple years while they retool?

Hopefully Mark Murphy is not on board with the view that Aaron just needed to be "unleashed" from Mike McCarthy. However I fear that he may share that perspective. I disagree with that perspective. However I believe it is one that is held to at least some degree by management.

Traditionally, I like Bennett because he was an old school WCO guy, with all those old traps, screens, the "enema draw," all those old school running and short, high percentage passing type plays. So yeah, Edgar was removed. How did THAT work out?

Again, I'm not arguing that they are both the same and different. I'm not saying they want continuity and don't want continuity. I'm saying they might not want to retool. I can type it slower and slower every time if you want.
“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.”
beast
6 years ago

You're arguing my point, if you say he was merely "demoted."

Again, I'm not saying he is both different and the same. Go back and read what I said. He KNOWS the team. He would not require a rebuild. Then again, maybe he would want to shitcan everybody and start over, dunno.

Aaron Rodgers is still here. THAT is the same. Mike McCarthy is gone. THAT is different. My hypothesis is that Aaron Rodgers wants to "do his thing." Mike McCarthy is no longer "standing in his way" of winning championships. He does not want to bring someone in who will change the system and requite 2-3 years to turn personell over to fit a new system. Bennett fits that bill. He knows the team. He knows the system.

It's not a question of Bennett CHANGING anything. The impediment (Mike McCarthy) has been removed. The change has already taken place. Now do you just let Aaron go out there and win championships, or do you bring someone in that will ALSO impede Aaron for the next couple years while they retool?

Hopefully Mark Murphy is not on board with the view that Aaron just needed to be "unleashed" from Mike McCarthy. However I fear that he may share that perspective. I disagree with that perspective. However I believe it is one that is held to at least some degree by management.

Traditionally, I like Bennett because he was an old school WCO guy, with all those old traps, screens, the "enema draw," all those old school running and short, high percentage passing type plays. So yeah, Edgar was removed. How did THAT work out?

Again, I'm not arguing that they are both the same and different. I'm not saying they want continuity and don't want continuity. I'm saying they might not want to retool. I can type it slower and slower every time if you want.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 


I have reread and your still talking out of your ass... Bennett wouldn't need a rebuild and every other coach would is complete biased talking. Because your saying Bennett would run a different scheme but not have to rebuild.

You're just in love with the old school west coast offense and think Bennett will run your system... That cool and fine.

But that doesn't mean Bennett is freaking perfect and there is McCarthy conspiracies to hold him back, that's just ridiculous. Also the fact that no body is really running the old school west coast system as it has evolved into new school west coast system... this would be like Al Davis trying to run 80s football in the 2000s.


Weather to retool or not, if you haven't noticed Gute started the process last year and the retooling and the coaches/Rodgers bad reaction to working with the new tools is what lead to the shity offense, but that should have been expected when running a chemistry system that is based in second/third reactions and working with a whole lot of new guys who are still learning the first reaction.... also getting rid of the guy with the best QB chemistry.

UserPostedImage
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
6 years ago

The average adult in the US has one nut and one boob. so averages a can be deceiving.

What is the average on run plays on 3rd and less than 4. Or more important, what percentage of the time do we run on 3rd and less than 4 and make it.

I will bet a shiney new dime it is far less than league average.

Spreading formations out and gaining 7 yards on second and 10 is great, but we have been inept in the run game in critical/ goal line situations FOR YEARS!!!

And it starts up front

Originally Posted by: KRK 



Even my wife laughed. Unfortunately way too many men have boobs.
UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
6 years ago

How many of those failed third-down conversions were on account of Aaron Rodgers throwing the ball into the dirt or failing to look for in the direction of a wide-open running back or tossing the ball out of bounds?

Originally Posted by: Nonstopdrivel 



Unfortunately, we will never know because even if Aaron's facemask is aimed one direction, he could be trying to look a Safety off and looking the other way.
UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
beast (1h) : Merry Christmas 🎄🎁
beast (9h) : Sounds like no serious injuries from the Saints game and Jacobs and Watson should play in the Vikings game
packerfanoutwest (14h) : both games Watson missed, Packers won
Martha Careful (16h) : 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.
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

5h / GameDay Threads / bboystyle

10h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

12h / Random Babble / beast

17h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

23-Dec / Random Babble / Martha Careful

22-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

19-Dec / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

17-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.