Pack93z
14 years ago
I won't argue the execution statement as it is right as rain. And that the execution as become more consistent as the season has progressed.

The crux of the disagreement is why it has improved.

I argue that the run play selection has assisted in improved pass protection and thus passing game execution.

And I am guilty of stitching several threads and premises into this one.. that an NFL team can function without an effective run attack. 😉
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
zombieslayer
14 years ago
Anyone willing to stay on topic? I think the question has been answered. Can we win games consistently with 92 yards rushing by our RBs? That has been the question. The answer has been proven. Instead of admitting you are wrong, you change the topic.

I at least can admit I was wrong about things. I was wrong about Favre in '08. I was wrong about D being less important than O. I was wrong about Randy Moss. I was wrong about TT.

Now, let's see if you can do it too. Admit you're wrong that we can win games when our RBs don't run for 92 yards, without veering off topic.

Once again:
65 yards @MN - result - 31-3 Packers
97 yards vs Cows - result - 45-7 Packers
76 yards @Jets - result - 9-0 Packers
70 yards vs MN - result - 28-24 Packers
63 yards vs Dolphins - result - 23-20 loss
127 yards @Skins - result - 16-13 loss
72 yards vs Lions - result - 28-26 Packers
43 yards @da Bears - result - 20-17 loss
65 yards vs Bills - result - 34-7 Packers
123 yards @Eagles - result - 27-20 Packers 

My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
Pack93z
14 years ago
Where did I say that we couldn't win with less than 92 yards in a game?

But if it makes you feel better.. I am wrong. I have little issue with admitting I error.. do it all the time.

Better? lol.

My first comment in the thread.. go back and look at the thread.. is became a quick pass vs run debate.. is that not staying in theme of the topic?

Butt Hurt my ass... lol.

We don't have to be a dynamic running team to win it, but we do have to run it effectively enough to assist the offensive line to help keep the defensive line in check.

Note how well the offensive line has played since we started to mix in the run from our passing sets.. it effectively "pauses" the defensive line. Which in turn reduces the all out pass rushes within the game, the defense at least has to check off the run before getting up field.

Also, it was a thing of beauty to see a number of 3rd and less than three's the past couple weeks.. it opens up the playbook for more of the playaction stuff and leads to more open passing lanes and deeper routes down the field.

IMO, one has little to complain about in Mike McCarthy playcalling the past 4 weeks.. balancing it up with the occasional run/draw out of 3 and 4 wide sets.

Oh the one other benefit of running the ball.. the offensive line gets to attack the defense instead of the inverse.. which will wear down a defensive line quicker than allowing them to pin their ears back an entire game.

We don't have a dynamic running attack.. but that doesn't mean the running attack can't help us win games. It does so much to set the table for the passing game that many overlook.

"pack93z" wrote:


"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
macbob
14 years ago

Now, let's see if you can do it too. Admit you're wrong that we can win games when our RBs don't run for 92 yards, without veering off topic.

"zombieslayer" wrote:



I admit that I never said "we can't win games when our RBs don't run for 92 yards".

I thought the general discussion was on whether or not we were running the ball enough, and thought one thread on the topic was enough.

So, I guess I also admit that I personally did not think the distinction between yardage and attempts was enough to justify a new thread.

And I also admit that you will see me saying consistently throughout this thread that we have been running the ball at a good ratio (including this last game)--except for a handfull of games, which almost without exception have been losses.

edit: and I also admit to not starting the flogging of this thread again that had been dormant for 10 days.

Fine, I'm convinced and buying into your obvious conclusion that run plays are a waste of time. Heck, we don't need no stinkin' running backs. If we want someone in the backfield with the QB, just put a WR/TE in to run a pass route. Otherwise, just go empty backfield all day. If running plays are a waste of time, why ever run one, right? If that's not seductive enough, think of the additional roster spots/draft picks we could save and use for WRs, etc.

Given all that, I find it funny that our own defense puts a premium on stopping the opposing teams running game and forcing them to go one-dimensional--into a pass-only attack. Wonder why that might be...

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/108328314.html 

Raji said the defense would continue to focus on stopping the run.

"Our philosophy, which has been working well for us so far, we want to stop the run initially so we can get teams in a more predictable state," he said. "Then we can come with the blitzing we love to do."

"JSonline.com" wrote:

PackFanWithTwins
14 years ago
I have been thinking about how McCarthy has been using Jackson. And I am wondering. Has it been a plan for some time. Giving the late game rushes to Kuhn and now Nance, saving wear on Jackson.

As the close of the season comes, and the cold weather, Jackson is going to be more rested and less beat up. Jackson is sitting 20, 30, 60, 80 less attempts than the others in the NFC in Turner, Bradshaw, Forte and McCoy
The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
porky88
14 years ago
The running game is only important if it's a ridiculously windy day. Beyond that, you can throw in anything IMO. The Raven game was cold last year. Packers won pretty convincingly. Ryan Grant barely got anything going.
Zero2Cool
14 years ago
Grant had something like 18 carries. Regardless of production, its the threat of the run that helps setup the play action pass.
UserPostedImage
zombieslayer
14 years ago

Question - would you rather have 150 running yards or 45 points?

The answer to that question is the answer to your question. I don't care how we get the points. We win games by scoring. If it's 50 runs and 1 pass, cool. If it's 50 passes and 1 run, cool. Passing gives us our best chance of scoring.

As for our RBs, Jackson's blocking ability cannot be praised enough. His blocking is in the top 30% of what I've seen, and I've watched a lot of RBs since 1976. I'm very proud of him.

FYI - The Steelers won the SB two years ago with 58 total yards rushing. The Saints won the SB last year with even less. Should we take away their Lombardi trophies because they didn't get enough rushing yards?

"zombieslayer" wrote:



Well folks, read this entire thread. We must have lost the Super Bowl because we didn't get our 92 yards rushing.

Damn I'm good.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
DakotaT
14 years ago
For the most part I'm in agreement with Zombie on this whole topic which tirelessly has invaded several threads. But that doesn't change the fact that I would like to see a power running game too for games which we have blown out. I've stated in the past that with the current left side of Clifton and College, that this is not possible. If we get a mauler LG to go with Sitton, this can change - but I do not envision it happening until the left side changes. Chad Clifton is a pass blocking specialist, but doesn't have the tenacity to be a great run blocker.
UserPostedImage
macbob
14 years ago

For the most part I'm in agreement with Zombie on this whole topic which tirelessly has invaded several threads. But that doesn't change the fact that I would like to see a power running game too for games which we have blown out. I've stated in the past that with the current left side of Clifton and College, that this is not possible. If we get a mauler LG to go with Sitton, this can change - but I do not envision it happening until the left side changes. Chad Clifton is a pass blocking specialist, but doesn't have the tenacity to be a great run blocker.

"DakotaT" wrote:



lol. Reading back over the entire thread, I find I still agree with myself...lol...
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (1h) : I thought that was the Lions OL
Mucky Tundra (1h) : Travis Glover placed on IR; seasons over for him
Zero2Cool (5h) : found bad sql in database, maybe site faster now?
dfosterf (5-Aug) : I'm going to call that a good move.
Zero2Cool (4-Aug) : Packers sign CB Corey Ballentine
Zero2Cool (4-Aug) : I'm not sure how to kill the draft order just yet so it's not so confusing.
Mucky Tundra (4-Aug) : *to be able
Mucky Tundra (4-Aug) : and because it's not a dynasty league (which makes a lot more sense to be ability to trade picks)
Mucky Tundra (4-Aug) : Oh I know; I was just exploring and it blew my mind that you could trade picks because of the whole reordering thing
Mucky Tundra (4-Aug) : Zero, I think I preferred my offer: your 1st for my 15th rounder
Zero2Cool (4-Aug) : Keep in mind, we do a draft reorder once all members locked in
Zero2Cool (4-Aug) : You can have my 12th Rd for your 2nd round
Mucky Tundra (4-Aug) : Hey i didn't know we could trade picks in fantasy
Mucky Tundra (3-Aug) : Update: Rock has tried a cheese curd, promises it's not his last
Zero2Cool (3-Aug) : watch it!! lol
Mucky Tundra (3-Aug) : you're right, we never did leave, the site just went down :P
Mucky Tundra (3-Aug) : Rock claims to have never eaten a cheese curd
Zero2Cool (3-Aug) : We did not leave.
Mucky Tundra (3-Aug) : Family Night! WE ARE SO BACK!
Mucky Tundra (2-Aug) : To this day, I'm still miffed about his 4 TD game against Dallas on Thanksgiving going to waste
Martha Careful (2-Aug) : Congratulations Sterling Sharpe. He was terrific and I loved watching him play.
beast (2-Aug) : I believe it's technically against the CBA rules, but Jerry just calls it a simple unofficial chat... and somehow gets away with it.
beast (2-Aug) : Jerry Jones is infamous for ̶n̶e̶g̶o̶t̶i̶a̶t̶i̶n̶g̶ chatting with players one on one... and going around the agent.
Mucky Tundra (1-Aug) : Oo just saw a blurb saying that Dallas negotiated directly with Parsons and not through his agent
Mucky Tundra (1-Aug) : I assumed that both guys will get paid, just a matter of when or how we get there
Zero2Cool (1-Aug) : McLaurin nor Micah going anywhere. They will get money
Mucky Tundra (1-Aug) : the Synder years or do they take care of one of their own?
Mucky Tundra (1-Aug) : Do the Commanders risk losing a top WR with an emerging QB just because he's turning 30 and potentially risk damaging the rebuild from
Mucky Tundra (1-Aug) : Turns 30 this September, plays at a high level and Washington has some cap space I believe
Mucky Tundra (1-Aug) : More interesting is Washington with Terry McLaurin
Mucky Tundra (1-Aug) : I would imagine Dallas will resolve this issue with a truckload of money
Zero2Cool (1-Aug) : Micah pulling a Myles with trade request
beast (1-Aug) : Packers should make some cheese forks
Mucky Tundra (31-Jul) : GRAB THE PITCHFORKS~
Zero2Cool (31-Jul) : CUT HIM
Mucky Tundra (31-Jul) : Socieltal collapse imminent
Mucky Tundra (31-Jul) : The West has fallen
Mucky Tundra (31-Jul) : After starting off camp with 25 straight made field goals, Brandon McManus has missed one
Zero2Cool (31-Jul) : But it should be stable
Zero2Cool (31-Jul) : It's probably gonna be slower.
Zero2Cool (31-Jul) : We're gonna just full go on to the new host.
Zero2Cool (31-Jul) : What crap. Site issues galore
Zero2Cool (30-Jul) : if PH dies, there is packerpeople com available
Zero2Cool (30-Jul) : database is on new host, eventually website will follow
Mucky Tundra (30-Jul) : Zero, regarding Ewers, you are correct.
Zero2Cool (30-Jul) : Sadly, this might be our life for awhile. I could put it on another host, but seems it was slower, although more stable
beast (30-Jul) : How long will it be down?
beast (30-Jul) : RIP site 😭
Zero2Cool (30-Jul) : Site will die, I have to restart it.
Zero2Cool (30-Jul) : Quinn stinks. Lot of underthrows. (my guess)
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2025 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM
COMMANDERS
Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM
Browns
Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM
Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM
Cardinals
Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM
PANTHERS
Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM
EAGLES
Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM
Giants
Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM
Bears
Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM
RAVENS
Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM
Vikings
Recent Topics
3m / Fantasy Sports Talk / dfosterf

8h / Around The NFL / wpr

5-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

5-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

4-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

3-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

3-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

3-Aug / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Zero2Cool

2-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

2-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

28-Jul / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

28-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

28-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

27-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

27-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.