Ryan Grant has been in the top 10 RBs after the Indy game. Before that he played weak, I guess you can blame that on the injured hammy. He didn't have a bad game last week.

---

Ryan Grant is the type of RB we need. Being able to involve him and Bjack in a two back system would be great. I really think that if Jennings does leave during Free Agency Grant and Jackson will be VERY important to our success next year.

---

I believe what is missing in the discussion here is that we emphasize the pass more than these other teams which we should. We are more talented than these teams in the passing game.

What I see as a possible rub on the ZBS is the reason these teams are successful with it is because running the ball is their primary offense and the pass is second.

In our case we are fortunate to have an efficient QB and deep talent at receiver and it would be dumb to try and force feed the running game as the primary attack and not look to the Greg Jennings' and Donald Drivers to score points for us.

I would say the fact we may not produce the numbers others do is that we don't have an "all in" mentality to beat teams with the running game and it may just take that to produce the numbers others have.

Personally, the way this team is built I would rather have a run game that compliments a primarily passing offense. Our OL is better at pass protection and our best skill players are the receivers.

---

I'm still quite convinced that the ZBS has been a wholesale failure in Green Bay. Mike McCarthy has repeatedly stated in press conferences that it is one of the tools in the arsenal, but that we are not a ZBS offense, per se. My biggest problem with the ZBS as it relates to Green Bay is in the personnel decisions that went hand in hand with the concept. We have built an offensive line that is suited for the ZBS through the draft. If you read draft scout analaysts, you will often find phrases like, "Best suited for a ZBS, he's on the lighter side, but is quick and finds his proper pad level and footwork, yada, yada, yada. That's what we keep getting, and developmental player is the norm. Why? Because they lack size, imo.
The loss of the ZBS coach, Jeff Jagowhatever, I think, factored in to the failure, for sure.

I also do not like one of the tenets of the ZBS, that is, the low-cut block. As you might recall, this is a block we do not practice due to the potential for injury to one of our own defenders in practice. I know it's legal, but that don't make it classy, jmo. Plus, if we ARE doing it, well, I'd just have to say FAIL, yet again, because I don't see Jarred Allen, for example, coming off the field after having been cut block by anyone on the Pack...(This is semi-jest, I think)

I sincerely wish for a complete abandonment of this scheme in one extremely important aspect... STOP drafting offensive linemen suited mostly for it... if you see in a draft report that "this guy is suited for the ZBS, yada yada yada... that spells FAIL. Cliffy and Tausch were never ZBSers...most of the rest are. I say get those linemen BIG and early, if through the draft... we'll figure out the schemes once we have the pure, raw talent and size. The ZBS CAN be run with big men, they just need to be able to MOVE...this equates to a combination found in the very early going in a draft, or through FA... not through mid-to-late rounds with semi-large men.

As to the coaching, it IS possible that they are doing a pretty good job with the talent given them. We don't have a ZBS guy, as has been pointed out. What we have is non-ZBS coaching with some ZBS football players, at least in the type of player that they are. I think a couple of 330 lb. linemen would do wonders for the perception of the coaching, again, jmo.

Easier said than done, when talking about "elite" guards.

Number of OG's taken in the 1st round:

2008: 0
2007: 1
2006: 1
2005: 1
2004: 0

Compare that to tackles:

2008: 7
2007: 3
2006: 1
2005: 2
2004: 3

And last year we did draft a more mauler type guard at 317lbs, who could easily put on weight to get up to 325 after a year in the NFL.

---

The problem is that everytime the running game seems to start to work, Mike McCarthy goes away from it.
and The Pack is way to predictable in their play calling.

I'll ask any of you, how many time have you sat in front of the tv and were able to the little dump of screen on 3rd and long, or the run to the left on 1st and 10?

No imagination IMHO.

---

I'm ok with the playcalling on about 98% of the plays, but on those other 2% I can't believe what I'm seeing (and it's not the 3rd down screens or 1st down runs).

---