Do We Need New Blood on Offense?· Page 2

Stevetarded
Registered

15 years ago

The problem with our offense when it comes to settling for 3 is the red zone rushing. We couldn't punch the ball in the endzone nomatter who was carrying it. I would like to see some statistics of how many 0 or negative yard runs we had in the red zone this year because it was bad. To win those 7 games by scoring TD's Rodgers would have basically had to end the season with around 35 passing TD's, I think that is quite a bit to ask.

"zombieslayer" wrote:

A few months ago, someone posted Aaron Rodgers 's red zone stats and they were off the charts. Taking a look at those stats, I was thinking "why the **** are we not putting the ball in Aaron's hands when we're in the RZ?"

So if the run isn't working in the RZ, screw it. Throw it in. Aaron doesn't turn the ball over. We have the receiving corps to do it. Donald Driver is The Man at 4 yard receptions. Let's utilize our strengths.

I don't think Mike McCarthy was aggressive in the RZ enough in '08.

"Stevetarded" wrote:

I would prefer they use the offseason to improve our problems than just hope to work around them next year. Which would mean making it so we can hopefully run the ball in the RZ next season instead of just calling more pass plays.

blank

warhawk
Senior Member

15 years ago

#12

One of the reasons is that he still has yet to feel the rush. Granted, half of this is the offensive line's fault, but Rodgers hasn't really "made" plays. It's the receivers doing the work.

"MassPackersFan" wrote:

Eh I'd have to disagree. There were a pretty large number of times where Rodgers scrambled and made something happen when nothing was there - Far more often than I expected out of a first year starter. Do we forget the jump pass or the magic behind the back TD pass so quickly?

On offense, I'm fine with most everything. I'd like to see Brandon Jackson get more carries. I would like to see us try to transition towards the post-Clifton era (as much as that will suck). Give me a balanced offense with a healthy dose of play-action and I'm happy.

"blueleopard" wrote:

I also recall several beautifully thrown long balls that could not have been set in the hands of the receivers any better. There is no way you throw for that many yards and it's all on the receivers. For every great catch I saw a great throw. I couldn't take away anything from either side.

"The train is leaving the station."

zombieslayer
Registered

15 years ago

#13

"warhawk" wrote:

Being anal, I think they could have been slightly better.

Rodgers hit the WR in his hands but didn't lead him, so as soon as the catch was made, the WR was tackled. Favre in '07 was able to hit the WR in stride so after the catch was made, he was at full speed and could turn the 50 yard completion to a 72 yard TD.

(now, not at all implying I'd rather have Favre as our QB. I'd take '09 Rodgers over '09 Favre. I'm just saying those throws COULD be better).

My man Donald Driver

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷

MassPackersFan
Member

15 years ago

#14

Sometimes. There were at least two bombs to Jennings last year that were WELL underthrown, that he still took to the house (Oakland and ermm... that other one where the D blitzed and Jennings was wide open).

The Denver and KC games truly overshadow those instances though.

DakotaT
Select Member

15 years ago

#15

When this offense can consistently pick up a 3 and 2 running the ball on a good defense, then it has arrived. Until we can pick up the first down on those tough situations, we continue to be a work in progress.

That said we are still a very good offense, but we lack the testicles to smash mouth when called upon. I appreciate the quaterback sneaks we now do, but I cringe evertime it's third and short and I see the handoff.

Cheesey
Preferred Member

15 years ago

#16

Let me clarify. I think we're fine with the offensive players we've got (with the possible exception, as zombieslayer said, of our O-Line).

I was talking about coaching. If we'd had a more aggressive OC, one that went for the throat instead of protecting a lead, I think we would have won a lot more games.

Do we, in your opinion, need a real offensive coordinator?

"Since69" wrote:

I agree......way too conservative on play calling. I think it was Zombie that was saying that all along, and i didn't agree at first, but as the season wore on he had me convinced he was right.
You have to play to WIN, not to not lose. Keep doing what got you the lead so that the other team can't get back in the game.
Get an OC that puts his foot on the opponent's throat once we have them down.
You will win more games with that attack then to sit back on your 3 point lead.

Rios39
Member

15 years ago

#17

"zombieslayer" wrote:

"warhawk" wrote:

Rodgers throws the ball more like Brady. He'll try to find one on one coverage and then throw the deep balls. A lot of time Favre has the play set in his hand like the OT game in Denver, the ball was in the air right off the hut. There was a few throws like that from Rodgers. But mostly you could see him look left, look right, look under then see one on one deep and throw it up.

There's pros and cons to both, The Pros for the Rodgers side of it is that he's scanning through his progressions well and doesn't have his mind made up off snap no matter what the coverage. The Cons is what we are discussing. The Pros to what Favre did last year was that if the coverage was off then it's easy TD. But then when he did it other games you see the negative like the Cowboys game, that's a product of making your mind up before the snap.

blank

Rios39
Member

15 years ago

#18

The guy that said Rodgers needed to deliver more. Well it was mentioned he'd need to throw 7 more TD = 35 TD year. Plus he ran for 4 TD so that would be expecting your QB to account for 39-40 TD in order to win games. Uh UH. If Rodgers accounts for 40 TD and we have a top 10 defense, well we'd likely be playing football right now.

blank

zombieslayer
Registered

15 years ago

#19

"Cheesey" wrote:

+1.

You got 3 points there that I really like:
1) ALWAYS play to win, not play to not lose,
2) Put your foot down your opponent's throat once you have them down,
3) You will win more games with that attack then to sit back on your 3 point lead.

All 3 assumptions are 100% correct. When he's down, kick him again. Then kick him again. Then kick him again. Keep kicking him until the referee says there's no time on the clock.

Remember that game when Favre threw 6 TDs? Now, this is NOT anything Favre vs Rodgers, but it's everything Jets vs Packers playcalling. Favre threw 2 TDs on 4th down. Yes. They had the game wrapped up but stilll went for it on 4th down.

I like that. For the record, Mike McCarthy was doing that in '07. He seemed to stop doing it in '08. We get into the Red Zone, with a near perfect QB (Aaron's red zone stats are incredible), and Mike McCarthy calls run play after run play. Urgh!

My man Donald Driver

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷

buckeyepackfan
Veteran Member

15 years ago

#20

I have been sayin it all year and getting bashed for it"I'm a hater"
Mike McCarthy plays not to lose the game instead of playing "to win the game!!!".

What do I know, I'm just a "Hater". :icon_smile: :icon_smile: :icon_smile: :icon_smile:

I was addicted to The Hokey Pokey, but I turned myself around!

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

Zero2Cool (23m) : We can say it. We don't play.

Mucky Tundra (1h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints

Mucky Tundra (1h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games

Mucky Tundra (1h) : Packers are not in and have not clinched a playoff spot.

buckeyepackfan (2h) : Packers are in, they need to keep winning to improve their seed#.

Mucky Tundra (11h) : Getting help would have been nice, but helping ourselves should always be the plan

beast (11h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings

bboystyle (11h) : We just need to win Monday night and were in

Mucky Tundra (15h) : Or ties, but let's be real here

Mucky Tundra (15h) : Other scenario was Falcons+Rams losses

Mucky Tundra (15h) : Needed a Falcons loss for a Seahawk loss to clinch

buckeyepackfan (15h) : Am I wring in saying if Tge Vikings beat The Seahawks, The Packers clinch?

Mucky Tundra (21-Dec) : Agreed; you stinks

Zero2Cool (21-Dec) : I'm not beating anyone. I stinks.

Mucky Tundra (21-Dec) : rough injury for tank dell. guy can't catch abreak

beast (21-Dec) : So far the college playoffs have sucked... One team absolutely dominates the other

beast (21-Dec) : Well even if you weren't positive towards a guy, you wouldn't nessarily want to tell the media that (if they don't know about it)

Martha Careful (21-Dec) : I think MLF want Love to look past the end half issues, and feel good about his play. Our coaches generally keep a very positive tone.

beast (21-Dec) : I think a great running game will do that for most QBs

packerfanoutwest (21-Dec) : Coach Matt LaFleur has said quarterback Jordan Love is playing the best football of his career.

beast (21-Dec) : Oh, that's how you keep beating buckeye, with cheating

Zero2Cool (20-Dec) : There is a rule that if your name starts with 'b' you lose 15 points. Hey, I don't make the rules, I just enforce them!

wpr (20-Dec) : and then there is Beast. Running away with it all.

beast (20-Dec) : As of tonight, 3 way tie for 2nd in Pick'em, that battle is interesting!

beast (20-Dec) : Lions vs Vikings could be the main last game as it could determine division winners or #1 vs #2 seed

Mucky Tundra (20-Dec) : Or if KC needs to win for the #1 seed

Mucky Tundra (20-Dec) : Right now it looks like the only prime worthy games are Det-Minny and KC-Denver (if Denver can clinch a wild card spot)

Mucky Tundra (20-Dec) : The entirety of week 18 being listed as flex is weird

Zero2Cool (19-Dec) : Matt LaFleur today says unequivocally "Ted Thompson had nothing to do with the drafting of Jordan Love."

Zero2Cool (19-Dec) : Apparently, the editing is what pieces comments together. That Ted thing ... fake news.

Zero2Cool (19-Dec) : LaFleur "opportunity that Ted Thompson thought was too good to pass up"

Zero2Cool (19-Dec) : Jordan Love pick was Ted Thompson's idea.

Mucky Tundra (19-Dec) : Kyle Shanahan on signing De'Vondre Campbell as a FA last offseason: “We obviously made a mistake.”

packerfanoutwest (19-Dec) : Alexander’s last season with GB

Martha Careful (18-Dec) : if I were a professional athlete, I would probably look to see who the agent is for Kirk Cousins and then use him

beast (18-Dec) : $100 million fully guaranteed Kirk Cousins gets benched for rookie

Mucky Tundra (18-Dec) : a lower case b

Mucky Tundra (18-Dec) : The real lie is how beast capitalized his name in his message while it's normally spelled with

packerfanoutwest (18-Dec) : haha that's a lie

beast (17-Dec) : Despite what lies other might tell, Beast didn't hate the Winter Warnings, it felt refreshing to Beast for some reason.

Zero2Cool (17-Dec) : whiteout uniforms in general are pretty lame and weak. NFL greed at it's worst

Martha Careful (17-Dec) : The Viking uniforms, the whiteout uniforms specifically absolutely suck

beast (17-Dec) : Thanks Zero2Cool, looks a lot better now

beast (17-Dec) : Seems like someone has a crush on me, can't stop talking about me

Zero2Cool (17-Dec) : Should be gooder now. The forum default theme went to goofy land.

Zero2Cool (17-Dec) : What the hell

packerfanoutwest (17-Dec) : yeah beast hates the Winter Warning Unies

Mucky Tundra (16-Dec) : Okay I'm glad to know it's not just something happening to me lol

Mucky Tundra (16-Dec) : Zero, did you copy the Packers uniforms from last night and white out the board?

beast (16-Dec) : Oh crap, is the board going to the Winter Warning Uniforms too?!? It's all white on white right now!

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 12:00 PM

Vikings

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS