Announcement PH Beta → Check it out! Click Me! (you might be see "unsafe", but it is safe)
Zero2Cool
16 years ago

Say what you want about the ZBS and the types of blockers it gives us, but since we've switched we have had extremely low sack numbers given up by these "smaller, mobile linemen." I don't have a problem with it in the running game either.

"MassPackersFan" wrote:



We weren't giving up many sacks with the old Power OL either.
UserPostedImage
Since69
16 years ago

McCarthy emphasizes that he does not run a pure ZBS, he mixes it up, but it does have a big effect on what kind of players the Packers use. The emphasis is on getting linemen who are more nimble, which usually means sacrificing some strength. The downside is that linemen of this type tend to have problems in pass protection, as they get overpowered at times.

"Greg C." wrote:



I sincerely hope this is McCarthy putting his best spin on the personnel moves that Thompson has made. It makes no sense otherwise. Either you zone block or you don't. Either your personnel are nimble enough to zone block or they're bulky enough to push people out of the way. We have to pick a side and stay with it. Offensive linemen don't have time to think. They have to react. What they do in any given situation must be second nature to them. It has to be practiced and repeated until it can be done without thought.

This half-assed "this week you'll be a road grader and next week you'll be throwing yourself at the other guys legs" crap has to stop. McCarthy has preached cohesiveness and consistency since his tenure began and this part-time zone blocking :xcensoredx: isn't going to allow that to happen - especially with young, inexperienced linemen.

On a personal note, zone blocking - and especially cut blocking - seems dirty to me. Its a good way to cause injuries. The only reason it works is because by the 3rd or 4th quarter the other team's defensive line is so beaten up they tend to slack off.


Say what you want about the ZBS and the types of blockers it gives us, but since we've switched we have had extremely low sack numbers given up by these "smaller, mobile linemen." I don't have a problem with it in the running game either.

"MassPackersFan" wrote:



Rodgers was sacked five times Sunday night.
UserPostedImage
zombieslayer
16 years ago



We weren't giving up many sacks with the old Power OL either.

"Zero2Cool" wrote:



That's the thing. If you look at Favre's sack totals, they started getting really low with Sherman. I'm no fan of Sherman, but he got one thing right - a good, solid OL. Why fix something that's not broken?
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
16 years ago


Rodgers was sacked five times Sunday night.

"Since69" wrote:



I refuse to judge this O-line while Tony Moll is in there.
UserPostedImage
agopackgo4
16 years ago

Say what you want about the ZBS and the types of blockers it gives us, but since we've switched we have had extremely low sack numbers given up by these "smaller, mobile linemen." I don't have a problem with it in the running game either.

"Zero2Cool" wrote:



We weren't giving up many sacks with the old Power OL either.

"MassPackersFan" wrote:



Not only that, but Like Larry McCarrin said in the lion game during the radio broadcast.. "Normally the QB takes the O line out to eat, but in the packers case the O line should take Rodgers out" Rodgers is definitily doing a great job avoiding pressure. And he is making that O lines stats look a lot better than how they have played.
Zero2Cool
16 years ago

Say what you want about the ZBS and the types of blockers it gives us, but since we've switched we have had extremely low sack numbers given up by these "smaller, mobile linemen." I don't have a problem with it in the running game either.

"agopackgo4" wrote:



We weren't giving up many sacks with the old Power OL either.

"Zero2Cool" wrote:



Not only that, but Like Larry McCarrin said in the lion game during the radio broadcast.. "Normally the QB takes the O line out to eat, but in the packers case the O line should take Rodgers out" Rodgers is definitily doing a great job avoiding pressure. And he is making that O lines stats look a lot better than how they have played.

"MassPackersFan" wrote:


Our previous QB was nifty in the pocket as well.


I would just much rather a OL that punishes people so we can get a better running game in the 4th quarter. I really believe that's going to be our downfall this year unless we pick it up a bit.
UserPostedImage
agopackgo4
16 years ago

Say what you want about the ZBS and the types of blockers it gives us, but since we've switched we have had extremely low sack numbers given up by these "smaller, mobile linemen." I don't have a problem with it in the running game either.

"Zero2Cool" wrote:



We weren't giving up many sacks with the old Power OL either.

"agopackgo4" wrote:



Not only that, but Like Larry McCarrin said in the lion game during the radio broadcast.. "Normally the QB takes the O line out to eat, but in the packers case the O line should take Rodgers out" Rodgers is definitily doing a great job avoiding pressure. And he is making that O lines stats look a lot better than how they have played.

"Zero2Cool" wrote:


Our previous QB was nifty in the pocket as well.


I would just much rather a OL that punishes people so we can get a better running game in the 4th quarter. I really believe that's going to be our downfall this year unless we pick it up a bit.

"MassPackersFan" wrote:



You think thats going to hurt us, trying to close out games? Or do you think we can get the job done with the passing game?
16 years ago
ZBS has nothing to do with pass protection unless you're saying it's a personnel issue. If so, who do you want to get rid of? Wells and Colledge? Spitz too? That basically means a completely replaced O-line within a few years. If you want to see struggling, I suggest we go that route.
UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
16 years ago

You think thats going to hurt us, trying to close out games? Or do you think we can get the job done with the passing game?

"agopackgo4" wrote:



I think having a OL that tries to finesse its way around allows the defense to have more energy in the 4th quarter. If we had a OL that punished a DL I just think we'd have a more productive 4th quarter running attack. Mike McCarthy made a excellent counterpoint to that theory and in support of the Zone Blocking scheme. I just don't recall it right now.







Say what you want about the ZBS and the types of blockers it gives us, but since we've switched we have had extremely low sack numbers given up by these "smaller, mobile linemen." I don't have a problem with it in the running game either.

"MassPackersFan" wrote:


ZBS has nothing to do with pass protection unless you're saying it's a personnel issue. If so, who do you want to get rid of? Wells and Colledge? Spitz too? That basically means a completely replaced O-line within a few years. If you want to see struggling, I suggest we go that route.

"MassPackersFan" wrote:


UserPostedImage
agopackgo4
16 years ago

You think thats going to hurt us, trying to close out games? Or do you think we can get the job done with the passing game?

"Zero2Cool" wrote:



I think having a OL that tries to finesse its way around allows the defense to have more energy in the 4th quarter. If we had a OL that punished a DL I just think we'd have a more productive 4th quarter running attack. Mike McCarthy made a excellent counterpoint to that theory and in support of the Zone Blocking scheme. I just don't recall it right now.

Idk the teams with great offensive lines, still seem to have something in the 4th quarter. Thats when their running backs are most effective.






Say what you want about the ZBS and the types of blockers it gives us, but since we've switched we have had extremely low sack numbers given up by these "smaller, mobile linemen." I don't have a problem with it in the running game either.

"agopackgo4" wrote:


ZBS has nothing to do with pass protection unless you're saying it's a personnel issue. If so, who do you want to get rid of? Wells and Colledge? Spitz too? That basically means a completely replaced O-line within a few years. If you want to see struggling, I suggest we go that route.

"MassPackersFan" wrote:

"MassPackersFan" wrote:

Fan Shout
Mucky Tundra (10h) : Greg Gumbel passed away today after bout with cancer.
buckeyepackfan (15h) : 1 NFC South @ NFC West @ AFC West other 3 games,
buckeyepackfan (15h) : Packers play NFC East and AFC North in 2025, plus 2 other games
Mucky Tundra (17h) : Geeze Zero get it right!😋
Zero2Cool (18h) : I guess 3 games. Whatever
Zero2Cool (18h) : Bleh, that only impacts two games.
Zero2Cool (18h) : Packers are gonna get 3rd place division schedule next year.
Mucky Tundra (19h) : Kanata, seek help! lol
beast (21h) : I was rooting for the Bears to win and hurt their draft pick status
Zero2Cool (21h) : Forgot there was even a game last night haha
TheKanataThrilla (21h) : That was terrible.
TheKanataThrilla (21h) : Watching that game in its entirety yesterday is proof positive that I am a football addict.
beast (22h) : And horrible time management multiple times... and not being able to score more than 3 points on a team with talent
beast (22h) : Realizing the Bears didn't fix it from the previous week and do the same thing, getting the game to overtime
beast (22h) : They probably are not tanking, but they've absolutely mismanagement some things, such as Vikings seeing the Packers blocked FG and realizing
Zero2Cool (23h) : Crazy of Bears to have that mindset that is
Zero2Cool (23h) : Hail Mary stop away from 5 - 2. Not sure how that flips to tanking. Crazy mindset if true
beast (27-Dec) : I've quietly questioned if Bears are tanking on purpose... they suddenly got a lot worse with some simple concepts like 101 clock management
wpr (27-Dec) : Watching bares fans melt down over how putrid their team is, so enjoyable. It's the gift that keeps on giving.
Mucky Tundra (27-Dec) : The Seattle Seahawks defeat the Chicago Bears 6-3. Jason Myers had 6 RBIs for Seattle while Cairo Santos had 3 RBI for Chicago
beast (27-Dec) : Not nessarily, he might of been injured either way. He's playing about 50% of the games the last 4 years
Zero2Cool (26-Dec) : If they'd been more patient with him, he'd be back already. Putting him out there vs Bears caused him to tweak it and here we are.
packerfanoutwest (26-Dec) : well this is his last season with the PAck, book it
beast (26-Dec) : Sounds like no Alexander (again), I'm wondering if his time with the Packers is done
Zero2Cool (26-Dec) : Could ban beast and I still don't think anyone catches him.
Mucky Tundra (26-Dec) : Houston getting dog walked by Baltimore
packerfanoutwest (25-Dec) : Feliz Navidad!
Zero2Cool (25-Dec) : Merry Christmas!
beast (25-Dec) : Merry Christmas 🎄🎁
beast (24-Dec) : Sounds like no serious injuries from the Saints game and Jacobs and Watson should play in the Vikings game
packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : both games Watson missed, Packers won
Martha Careful (24-Dec) : 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
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
13h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

19h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

19h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

19h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

20h / Random Babble / Martha Careful

20h / Around The NFL / Martha Careful

27-Dec / Random Babble / Mucky Tundra

27-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

25-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

25-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

25-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

25-Dec / GameDay Threads / bboystyle

24-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

24-Dec / Random Babble / beast

24-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

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