PackerTraxx
9 years ago

I'm not trying to be negative at all, just asking a question. Why is everyone so much higher on our offense this year than they were last year. It's all the same players, and we currently have an unknown as the play caller.

Originally Posted by: gbguy20 



What uffda said. Plus we should/could be 4,5,6 deep at receiver this year. Bakhtiari and Lindsley should get better without any of the rest of the OL slipping. Even Lacy and Cobb are young enough they should improve.
Why is Jerry Kramer not in the Hall of Fame?
texaspackerbacker
9 years ago

What uffda said. Plus we should/could be 4,5,6 deep at receiver this year. Bakhtiari and Lindsley should get better without any of the rest of the OL slipping. Even Lacy and Cobb are young enough they should improve.

Originally Posted by: PackerTraxx 



Game planning means more than play calling, and I'm sure that will involve McCarthy, Clement, and Bennett.

I HOPE they get away from the idea that they need to establish the run. Pass first, pass second, run as a change of pace and when you are 3 or 4 TDs up in the second half. I also want to see LOTS of 3, 4, and 5 WR sets this season.

As was said, the continuity of having the same lineup as well as improvement from the two young O Linemen should make for improvement. Also, having better personnel on D should result in more offensive possessions/snaps.

Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
sschind
9 years ago

Game planning means more than play calling, and I'm sure that will involve McCarthy, Clement, and Bennett.

I HOPE they get away from the idea that they need to establish the run. Pass first, pass second, run as a change of pace and when you are 3 or 4 TDs up in the second half. I also want to see LOTS of 3, 4, and 5 WR sets this season.

As was said, the continuity of having the same lineup as well as improvement from the two young O Linemen should make for improvement. Also, having better personnel on D should result in more offensive possessions/snaps.

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 



I think you are going to be disappointed Texas. While we will always be a pass oriented offense MM likes to establish the run and with Lacy and Starks we have the guys to do it. Personally I like the balanced attack. The Packers were about 55/45 pass/run last year and that's a number I'm fine with. I know you'd like to see somewhere around 90/10 or so 😁 but IMO with a guy like Lacy and a backup like Starks its a waste if they don't get at least 20-25 carries per game.

steveishere
9 years ago

I think you are going to be disappointed Texas. While we will always be a pass oriented offense Mike McCarthy likes to establish the run and with Lacy and Starks we have the guys to do it. Personally I like the balanced attack. The Packers were about 55/45 pass/run last year and that's a number I'm fine with. I know you'd like to see somewhere around 90/10 or so 😁 but IMO with a guy like Lacy and a backup like Starks its a waste if they don't get at least 20-25 carries per game.

Originally Posted by: sschind 



I just think back to all the games last year when the offense would be in a rut and then Lacy would break a big run or a drive with several good runs and we'd score and the entire offense would get back on track. Having someone like Lacy just makes the passing game that much harder to deal with. He's a legit weapon, may as well use him.
texaspackerbacker
9 years ago

I think you are going to be disappointed Texas. While we will always be a pass oriented offense Mike McCarthy likes to establish the run and with Lacy and Starks we have the guys to do it. Personally I like the balanced attack. The Packers were about 55/45 pass/run last year and that's a number I'm fine with. I know you'd like to see somewhere around 90/10 or so 😁 but IMO with a guy like Lacy and a backup like Starks its a waste if they don't get at least 20-25 carries per game.

Originally Posted by: sschind 



I'd only be disappointed if the Packers fall short of the Super Bowl.

As for a waste, I'd much rather waste those two than possibly the greatest QB in NFL history, certainly the greatest right now. I think 90/10 is a stretch even for me, but I'd rather have something like 75/25 or 80/20. You don't need to establish the run if you have variety in your passing game.

Improved as it is, the O Line is still somewhat of a weakness; Aaron Rodgers has proven that he can thrive anyway - escaping, throwing on the run, etc. Lacy and even more so Starks only show up when the blocking is there, which often it isn't, and even then, they virtually never get more yards than a mid-range pass play. If we had a Melvin Gordon-like runner who was a threat to take it to the house with one little seam, it would be different. Lacy just ain't that way, and I wouldn't be surprised if Starks doesn't even make the team if either of those UDFAs look decent.
Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
warhawk
9 years ago
You have to be able to run the ball to open the offense up. If the opposing team knows the Packers are going 75/25 or more passing the ball they are going to game plan for exactly that. Where the Packers have improved is against teams that have set their game plan to defend the pass allowing for opportunity in the running game. There was a time when we couldn't run the ball even when the defense was saying "go ahead and try to run the ball." Those were most often very frustrating games to watch.

If you can run the ball it sets up play action and allows time for Rodgers to make plays vs. just lining up and going after him.

IMO the Oline is a very steady group. Keep in mind teams are going after Rodgers. They can't let him stand back there so they are bringing all sorts of pressure just like other teams see that have the top QB's. I think the Packers Oline does a very good job considering this. Factoring in a solid run game without doubt helps in this cause.

Sure, your going to gain more yards on a successful pass play than running the ball on average but what about the fact that the successful pass play happens, in part, because you have a decent running game. When a team has to play it straight up it allows successful plays to happen.

The Packers will probably have the best offense in the NFL and the run game will definately be a part of that. Now that they have developed a decent running offense it would be a huge mistake to decide you really don't need one. When this offense and Rodgers is clicking they are moving quickly interchanging pass and run right down the field and it's actually a beautiful thing to watch.
Don't screw with it.
"The train is leaving the station."
texaspackerbacker
9 years ago

You have to be able to run the ball to open the offense up. If the opposing team knows the Packers are going 75/25 or more passing the ball they are going to game plan for exactly that. Where the Packers have improved is against teams that have set their game plan to defend the pass allowing for opportunity in the running game. There was a time when we couldn't run the ball even when the defense was saying "go ahead and try to run the ball." Those were most often very frustrating games to watch.

If you can run the ball it sets up play action and allows time for Rodgers to make plays vs. just lining up and going after him.

IMO the Oline is a very steady group. Keep in mind teams are going after Rodgers. They can't let him stand back there so they are bringing all sorts of pressure just like other teams see that have the top QB's. I think the Packers Oline does a very good job considering this. Factoring in a solid run game without doubt helps in this cause.

Sure, your going to gain more yards on a successful pass play than running the ball on average but what about the fact that the successful pass play happens, in part, because you have a decent running game. When a team has to play it straight up it allows successful plays to happen.

The Packers will probably have the best offense in the NFL and the run game will definately be a part of that. Now that they have developed a decent running offense it would be a huge mistake to decide you really don't need one. When this offense and Rodgers is clicking they are moving quickly interchanging pass and run right down the field and it's actually a beautiful thing to watch.
Don't screw with it.

Originally Posted by: warhawk 



I still say, the offense is better off if we pass more - pass first, only run rarely as a diversion, etc.

Check the years where the Packers offense was the strongest; I'm pretty sure you will find a lot of games like that - 75/25 and then some. Last year with the commitment - to some extent anyway - to run a lot, the offense, while still outstanding, regressed a little bit.

No, you don't need to "run the ball to open the offense up" - pretty much the opposite. You pass and pass and pass, the the defense is spread and open for the run. As I said, the Packers O Line, while getting better, still doesn't open a lot of holes, especially when the D knows a run is likely. The O Line is not exactly super at pass protection either, but time after time, Aaron Rodgers has proved he can get it to his receivers even though he has to escape the pass rush.

A "decent running offense" with Lacy means out of ten carries, you might get 2 or 3 no gains, 1 or 2 "big" gains - 10-20 yards, and maybe 5-7 "decent" carries - maybe 3-6 yards. If Aaron Rodgers throws the ball ten times, even if the other team knows it's coming, at least 5 or 6 will be as good or better than those Lacy "big" gains and only maybe 2 or 3 will be incomplete or sacks. I rest my case hahahaha.

"Don't screw with it"? That was my line when they people first started yapping about this run first crap.
Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
steveishere
9 years ago
You really think offense regressed last year? Last years offense was the 2nd highest since Rodgers has been here and was the 3rd highest scoring offense of the last 3 years, that's 3rd out of 95 teams. That's with Rodgers playing on a damaged calf for a good portion of the season.
Zero2Cool
9 years ago

UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
Martha Careful (2h) : RIP Packer Safety Tim Brown
beast (20h) : Yeah, but also some of the wording suggestions Jax only pranked called the QB, not the others... and if he had an open spreadsheet & 3 calls
beast (20h) : Thank goodness he's not leaving the Turtle in the Red Tide
Mucky Tundra (20h) : Cowboys 1st round pick Tyler Booker will indeed be bringing his pet turtle to Dallas with him
Mucky Tundra (20h) : that contained all prospects info and contact
Mucky Tundra (20h) : beast, according the Falcons statement Jax came across it on an ipad. If I had to guess, probably an open spread sheet or something
Zero2Cool (21h) : Simmons put up an emoji with cheese.
beast (21h) : Not sure anyone is interested in Isaiah Simmons... Collin Oliver might of taken his potential slot
beast (21h) : I'm going with Jax Ulbrich is not telling the whole truth... he accidentally came across it? Why would a defensive coordinator have a QB #?
Zero2Cool (22h) : He's not that great, but final piece of the script.\
Zero2Cool (22h) : If we add Isaiah Simmons, book your Super Bowl tickets
Mucky Tundra (22h) : Colts 1st round TE Tyler Warren also got prank called, was that Jax Ulbrich as well?
Zero2Cool (22h) : Jax Ulbrich, Jeff Ulbrich’s son, released an apology for his role in the Shedeur Sanders prank call.
Martha Careful (22h) : apparently he did not participate in practice or play on the east west shrine game nor the NFL combine. The kid was a mediocre spoiled brat
Mucky Tundra (23h) : Yeah that one that was a super wounded duck that Sanders supporters are highlighting to prove a point
Zero2Cool (23h) : Shough is the guy who missed guys at combine isn't he?
beast (23h) : It's not official until I'm dead! I have a chance still! (Not really)
Mucky Tundra (27-Apr) : I could feel my body decomposing in real time when I read that
Mucky Tundra (27-Apr) : @MIKEYSAINRISTIL Tyler Shough will officially be the last person drafted to the NFL born in the 1900’s
Mucky Tundra (26-Apr) : saw the tweet, he meant the city
Mucky Tundra (26-Apr) : Was that for the team or the city?
Zero2Cool (26-Apr) : Adam Schefter @AdamSchefter Ā· 3m Draft grade is in: Green Bay gets an A. The people, the city, the venue were all superb. NFL Draft’s next
Zero2Cool (26-Apr) : Matt LaFleur says Jaire Alexander is participating in #Packers offseason program, which has been conducted virtually during this first week
Zero2Cool (26-Apr) : āœ… ...
buckeyepackfan (26-Apr) : Check
Zero2Cool (26-Apr) : Matthew Golden cahanged 81 to 22??
TheKanataThrilla (26-Apr) : Sam Howell to Vikings...guess no Aaron
Martha Careful (26-Apr) : 1 round 7 min, with one extra minute if there is a trade. 2nd round 4 minutes, 3rd -3, 2 thereafter IMO
Martha Careful (26-Apr) : Agree
dfosterf (26-Apr) : Great idea imo
dfosterf (26-Apr) : 1st round to 7 minutes with one extension
dfosterf (26-Apr) : NFL comissioner wants to shorten the 2st
Mucky Tundra (26-Apr) : @jalenreagors They’re discussing if Sheduer can go back to college on NFL Network LMFAOOOOO
beast (26-Apr) : Great point Martha
beast (26-Apr) : Buddy Ryan used to say if a candy bar goes missing, there are two to blame, Rex and Rob 🤪 jk 😁
Martha Careful (26-Apr) : Bum Phillips used to say there are two ways to get better. Get better players or get players to play better. We have a new DL coach
Zero2Cool (26-Apr) : Yes. Look at the losses last year. They can win.
beast (26-Apr) : Can Packers win with their current DL?
bboystyle (26-Apr) : waiting for a pass rusher.
dfosterf (25-Apr) : 5 minutes between picks in the 3rd
dfosterf (25-Apr) : 3rd. Hate this phone
dfosterf (25-Apr) : 4rd
dfosterf (25-Apr) : 5 minutes in the 4
dfosterf (25-Apr) : 7 minutes between picks in the 2nd round
Martha Careful (25-Apr) : Sorry to bitch, but the headline writers in that section absolutely mislead, or don't know how to read. It is maddening
Martha Careful (25-Apr) : No thanks. Not a dependable guy to be in the right place and run the right route. Dumb as a box of rocks.
Zero2Cool (25-Apr) : Losing 2nd round pick for a one year rental, not ideal. Especially a headcase.
TheKanataThrilla (25-Apr) : Pickens for Jaire may be interesting. Definitely not sure we want Pickens long term.
dfosterf (25-Apr) : No.Absolutely not
Zero2Cool (25-Apr) : NO NO NO NO NO NO!!1 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬
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
Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

19h / Packers Draft Threads / Mucky Tundra

20h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

20h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

21h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

22h / Around The NFL / bboystyle

22h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

23h / Packers Draft Threads / Mucky Tundra

27-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

27-Apr / Packers Draft Threads / wpr

27-Apr / Packers Draft Threads / wpr

27-Apr / Packers Draft Threads / wpr

27-Apr / Packers Draft Threads / wpr

27-Apr / Packers Draft Threads / wpr

27-Apr / Packers Draft Threads / wpr

Headlines
Copyright Ā© 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.comā„¢. All Rights Reserved.