So what does this have to do with the packers? ...

What I saw is how both teams often got blitzed either from the end or from unknown positions and how the teams had plays in place to help make plays even thou there was a man(men) coming.

Now these are both older guys at the QB position; so its not like the can move that good compared to their younger counter-parts.

What I saw was short pass or dumps/screens. Often times it looked like these plays were the primary play or often it was the option of a secondary play. Meaning if the blitz comes then your option is to get it to this guy ...

Ya farve took some sacks but he could of taken alot more if he held onto the ball alot longer and if they didnt have the options of doing the short screens or passes.

I didnt rewatch the greenbay game yet; but there is no reason why we cant have plays that work of a screen or a short pass to a TE/RB.

So if anything I blame our coaches for these lousey OL coverages. Obviously putting more guys to block isnt going to do the trick.(since as someone posted already we tried that this week)

IMO having options for rodgers to get rid of the ball quickly. We dont always have to make the 40+ yard play. Ill take a 8-12 yard throw or a short screen over a sack anyday.

your thoughts?

"Dulak" wrote:

"Dulak" wrote:

Evad - Still, to compensate for a bad OL, you have to improve your release. Take 3 steps back, and release. I'm seeing too much drop in the pocket and wait for an open receiver. That's a luxury we don't have right now.

You can also win games with no running game. We proved that in '07.

"zombieslayer" wrote:

The Vikings don't pass block well at all either. But they aren't running the deep routes. I personally think we need to try to get a running game going and shorten up our routes. I think most of the big plays should come on play actions and just drop backs.

Trying to hold the ball long in shot gun is going to get Rodgers killed.

"Rios39" wrote: