More Banjo: Week 3 vs Lions

[hoosier]

17 rushes. 10 passes in the second half. I don't know how I can put it more plain than that.

McCarthy copped to it post-game. He ran more to protect the D. He didn't protect it much.

The more you rush versus pass, the less you score. Rodgers was less effective in the 2nd half and there were two drops at least. He also had eight fewer attempts.

You are focusing on the run/pass balance (the 17/10 ratio is skewed by the QB scrambles), but my point is that the real problem was with offensive inefficiency, inability to sustain drives. When they were racking up the points in the first half it was because they were moving the ball consistently. The bad throw, throwaways under duress and drop were as much to blame for that if not more than the running; even in reasonable down & distance opportunities they were not effective. In fact, when they were able to get first downs in the second half it was on the ground.

[vince]

You are focusing on the run/pass balance (the 17/10 ratio is skewed by the QB scrambles), but my point is that the real problem was with offensive inefficiency, inability to sustain drives. When they were racking up the points in the first half it was because they were moving the ball consistently. The bad throw, throwaways under duress and drop were as much to blame for that if not more than the running; even in reasonable down & distance opportunities they were not effective. In fact, when they were able to get first downs in the second half it was on the ground.

I looked at the run/pass play ratio as well PB and I believe you're inadvertently including a field goal, 2 punts and 3 kneel-down victory formation plays as running plays. The presumption that running the ball more precluded the Packers from scoring more in the 2nd half doesn't hold in this case, but for the sake of accuracy the ratio was 11-10. Obviously the 3 kicking plays don't count as runs, and the kneel-downs after the Lions were unable to get the ball back or stop the clock would be misleading to include. It does offer a perspective that coaches espouse more than many fans though.

At the very end of the game when the Packers were in complete control of the score, ball and clock, no one would suggest they should call a pass play under any circumstance at that point. Even handing the ball off would be considered universally stupid. A voluntary 2 yard "loss" and minimizing the chances of loss of possession at that point dominate the "winning" decision criteria. Risk appetite approaches zero as clock, ball and score control approaches 100%. No one would likely argue that.

From those extreme positions on their respective sliding scales then, risk appetite slides up from zero as clock ball and score control slide down. A lot of things impact control of those factors as we know, but McCarthy has proven to have his pulse on the interworking of those factors. He's not perfect. No one is. But he's pretty much proven to be as it gets through exeptional results at the highest level. I'm extremely confident he's forgotten through all his years experience with these situations more than any of us can hope to know. We get uptight and uncertain as games ebb and flow and things sometimes aren't pretty - while McCarthy banks successes closing out games at elite rates.