More Banjo: Week 3 vs Lions

[texaspackerbacker]

The start of the second half had a definite, different feel to it than the start of the 1st half. The emphasis at the beginning of the 1st half was an aggressive passing attack. Pass first to set up the run, Tex would say.

At the start of the second half the emphasis was on Lacy pounding the pill. We were leading 31-10 at half-time, so Stubby coming out with a conservative plan to run more in the second half (take his foot off the gas) is kind of conventional wisdom. I didn't mind it.

But when Detroit started moving the ball/scoring and the running game stalled due to zero rushing yardage on 1st down and penalties, I felt we should have gone back to the aggressive passing attack, especially in the 4th quarter and especially at the end of the game.

Like someone said (pbmax, I think) it isn't a sound plan to rely on Arod to scramble on third down for 10 yards for a much needed 1st down in those situations.

Uh, I did kinda mind it - reverting to old run-first shit and floundering offensively. It's like, incredibly, he doesn't trust Aaron Rodgers to avoid interceptions. Going 3 and out or close to it with his "conservative" approach (I HATE use of the word "conservative" to mean hyper-cautious) is NOT playing it safe. You can lose a game a helluva lot easier that way than putting the ball in Rodgers' hands.

A word about that other post: I'm getting kinda negative about Randall. Rollins plays better in man coverage, and Gunter plays better yet. Hell, the rookie Hawkins (other than his colossal touchdown-giving blunder) seemed to have better instincts and athleticism than Randall. All three of those others do. Randall looks like he's a step slow and he doesn't realize it.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Uh, I did kinda mind it - reverting to old run-first shit and floundering offensively. It's like, incredibly, he doesn't trust Aaron Rodgers to avoid interceptions. Going 3 and out or close to it with his "conservative" approach (I HATE use of the word "conservative" to mean hyper-cautious) is NOT playing it safe. You can lose a game a helluva lot easier that way than putting the ball in Rodgers' hands.

A word about that other post: I'm getting kinda negative about Randall. Rollins plays better in man coverage, and Gunter plays better yet. Hell, the rookie Hawkins (other than his colossal touchdown-giving blunder) seemed to have better instincts and athleticism than Randall. All three of those others do. Randall looks like he's a step slow and he doesn't realize it.

I basically agree with you. I generally don't like Stubby's conservative strategy to preserve a win by pounding the pill, mainly on the grounds of what hoosier said: you risk losing that scoring momentum.

But Stubby's never gonna change. He's old school Steelers. He WANTS his team to be able to control the game by pounding the rock. He's said it countless times over the years.

The problem is IMO the game has changed. You CAN'T control the game by pounding the rock anymore. It's now a pass-first league. Even the rules favor the passing game. Few games are truly out of reach no matter how far behind you are. And Stubby kinda understands this too because when he needs points he reverts back to passing like there's no tomorrow.

So he's caught in a kind of contradiction: his instinct to control the game by rushing vs the reality that you score points (and convert third and long) by passing. IMO that's why, in so many of these games (and end of game, crunch time scenarios), Stubby's approach seems schizophrenic.

[hoosier]

I basically agree with you. I generally don't like Stubby's conservative strategy to preserve a win by pounding the pill, mainly on the grounds of what hoosier said: you risk losing that scoring momentum.

But Stubby's never gonna change. He's old school Steelers. He WANTS his team to be able to control the game by pounding the rock. He's said it countless times over the years.

The problem is IMO the game has changed. You CAN'T control the game by pounding the rock anymore. It's now a pass-first league. Even the rules favor the passing game. Few games are truly out of reach no matter how far behind you are. And Stubby kinda understands this too because when he needs points he reverts back to passing like there's no tomorrow.

So he's caught in a kind of contradiction: his instinct to control the game by rushing vs the reality that you score points (and convert third and long) by passing. IMO that's why, in so many of these games (and end of game, crunch time scenarios), Stubby's approach seems schizophrenic.

Two things in McCarthy's defense. First, the opposing defense will be taking more chances in the second half yesterday, so if he continues with the aggressive approach then the odds of a turnover or quick three-and-out go up, and when you're up 31-3 at half, the very last thing in the world you want to see is a quick pick-6 going the other way. Nothing gets the opponent who you've been stomping on all first half back in the game like a pick-6. Second, what McCarthy did in the second half yesterday has ramifications for the bigger picture. The Packer offense will be much more formidable if and when it gets to the point where it can impose its will on the defense, and the best way to do that is to run it down their throat. When it doesn't work it can be incredibly frustrating to watch, and can lead to the kind of excruciating second half we witnessed yesterday. But if, come December and January, this team can get to that point of being able to impose its will, we will all be much happier fans.

[beveaux1]

Two things in McCarthy's defense. First, the opposing defense will be taking more chances in the second half yesterday, so if he continues with the aggressive approach then the odds of a turnover or quick three-and-out go up, and when you're up 31-3 at half, the very last thing in the world you want to see is a quick pick-6 going the other way. Nothing gets the opponent who you've been stomping on all first half back in the game like a pick-6. Second, what McCarthy did in the second half yesterday has ramifications for the bigger picture. The Packer offense will be much more formidable if and when it gets to the point where it can impose its will on the defense, and the best way to do that is to run it down their throat. When it doesn't work it can be incredibly frustrating to watch, and can lead to the kind of excruciating second half we witnessed yesterday. But if, come December and January, this team can get to that point of being able to impose its will, we will all be much happier fans.

I'm pretty sure that MM is not as concerned with the interception as he is with keeping the clock moving. We had the ball three times in the 2nd half not counting our last "end the game" drive. We scored on one of the drives and punted twice. One three and out when we started the drive with an incomplete pass. Heck, the Lions only had the ball 5 times in the 2nd half. The problem was that our defense allowed them to trade time off the clock for TDs and the Lions converted four of those drives into 24 points. If I have a 3 TD lead at halftime the clock is my friend.

I understand the philosophy, but when the defense can't get a stop, it makes it tough on the fans.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Two things in McCarthy's defense. First, the opposing defense will be taking more chances in the second half yesterday, so if he continues with the aggressive approach then the odds of a turnover or quick three-and-out go up, and when you're up 31-3 at half, the very last thing in the world you want to see is a quick pick-6 going the other way. Nothing gets the opponent who you've been stomping on all first half back in the game like a pick-6. Second, what McCarthy did in the second half yesterday has ramifications for the bigger picture. The Packer offense will be much more formidable if and when it gets to the point where it can impose its will on the defense, and the best way to do that is to run it down their throat. When it doesn't work it can be incredibly frustrating to watch, and can lead to the kind of excruciating second half we witnessed yesterday. But if, come December and January, this team can get to that point of being able to impose its will, we will all be much happier fans.

From now on you are not hoosier to me. You are Stubby II.

[texaspackerbacker]

Two things in McCarthy's defense. First, the opposing defense will be taking more chances in the second half yesterday, so if he continues with the aggressive approach then the odds of a turnover or quick three-and-out go up, and when you're up 31-3 at half, the very last thing in the world you want to see is a quick pick-6 going the other way. Nothing gets the opponent who you've been stomping on all first half back in the game like a pick-6. Second, what McCarthy did in the second half yesterday has ramifications for the bigger picture. The Packer offense will be much more formidable if and when it gets to the point where it can impose its will on the defense, and the best way to do that is to run it down their throat. When it doesn't work it can be incredibly frustrating to watch, and can lead to the kind of excruciating second half we witnessed yesterday. But if, come December and January, this team can get to that point of being able to impose its will, we will all be much happier fans.

Do you seriously think the odds are significant even a little bit that Aaron Rodgers will throw interceptions if he basically continues to march? - uses play calling similar to the first half, which wasn't exactly pass-first as I would like to see it, but which was a major step in the right direction. The second half indeed was excruciating, but that was primarily because, as Maxi said, of McCarthy's damn stubbornness to run first and worse yet, his weird lack of trust for Aaron Rodgers not to give away the game. What QB in all of football avoids interceptions like Aaron Rodgers - even with the constant pass rush pressure on him?

[ThunderDan]

On our 12 "real" runs in the 2nd half we gained 60 yards. That averages to 5 ypc.

[Maxie the Taxi]

On our 12 "real" runs in the 2nd half we gained 60 yards. That averages to 5 ypc.

Averages don't really matter much. Situations matter. When you run on 1st down, or first and second down and gain no yards or 2 yards in a "must get a 1st down situation," you are then forced to throw the ball on third down (maybe even 2nd down) and everyone knows it.

[pbmax]

I think my jinxing powers have retreated as Stafford wasn't disabled by Perry at all today.

So I feel more confident in noting that I haven't had much cause to be mad at Lane Taylor save for one penalty I think. Anyone else?

[Patler]

... I haven't had much cause to be mad at Lane Taylor save for one penalty I think. Anyone else?

I tend to forget that the starting LG is new, and not Josh Sitton. That is a good thing.

[RashanGary]

I tend to forget that the starting LG is new, and not Josh Sitton. That is a good thing.

It's making more sense now. I was surprised. I didn't realize how much they liked lane. That said, I never suspected Tt made some weird emotional random act of stupidity.

I do think they Packer brass probably believes in paying for 3 OL and going cheap on the other two. So I wasn't as surprised as most. I really did like Bahktiari. I also felt that with a good c and a good LT, the need for paying top dollar for a lg goes down.

I don't usually say I told ya so, and this isn't really to you or any one in particular, but I was fairly certain it wasn't any of the conspiracys people were toting here or in the paper. And I'm a big conspiracy theorist with the govt. I just saw no motivation for a GM to act out in same weird fit of stupid. I highly doubted that to the the case.

[Smidgeon]

Just finished watching on Game Pass. Here are my thoughts:

Charles Davis may know a lot about football, but he knows nothing about broadcasting and got several facts wrong. My football IQ got worse listening to him. Makes me miss Madden who had a gift for saying things simply enough they sounded dumb but were actually teaching you about the game.

Nick Perry earned consistent double teams by the fourth quarter. He and Daniels were consistently keyed in on by the Lions O-line. I know we discussed Perry vs Neal ad nauseum, but I think there's no doubt Perry was the better choice.

I think James Starks is done. He's been a good change of pace back since 2010, but I think he's pretty much given everything he can with nothing left.

Blood and Guts--aka Blake and Jake--don't really strike me as star power guys. I don't look at them like they have a chance to be anywhere near special. In fact, they both play like they're eminently replaceable. BUT (and that's a big but) they are always in the right spot, making the right tackle, at the right time. No broken plays, no missteps, no mental errors. They're the epitome of a "lunch pail linebacker" who just shows up every day and gets the job done. I think we'll forget about them for a long time, except when we consciously remind ourselves "hey, they STILL haven't screwed up".

Damarius Randall will be fine. He's still young. Shields was supposed to be Man #1 back there. But without Shields, without Burnett, Randall is being asked to be Man #1. I think he'll get there one day. But right now, I just hope it doesn't wreck his confidence. He had another bad game, but I don't think he's a bad player.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Just finished watching on Game Pass. Here are my thoughts:

Charles Davis may know a lot about football, but he knows nothing about broadcasting and got several facts wrong. My football IQ got worse listening to him. Makes me miss Madden who had a gift for saying things simply enough they sounded dumb but were actually teaching you about the game.

Nick Perry earned consistent double teams by the fourth quarter. He and Daniels were consistently keyed in on by the Lions O-line. I know we discussed Perry vs Neal ad nauseum, but I think there's no doubt Perry was the better choice.

I think James Starks is done. He's been a good change of pace back since 2010, but I think he's pretty much given everything he can with nothing left.

Blood and Guts--aka Blake and Jake--don't really strike me as star power guys. I don't look at them like they have a chance to be anywhere near special. In fact, they both play like they're eminently replaceable. BUT (and that's a big but) they are always in the right spot, making the right tackle, at the right time. No broken plays, no missteps, no mental errors. They're the epitome of a "lunch pail linebacker" who just shows up every day and gets the job done. I think we'll forget about them for a long time, except when we consciously remind ourselves "hey, they STILL haven't screwed up".

Damarius Randall will be fine. He's still young. Shields was supposed to be Man #1 back there. But without Shields, without Burnett, Randall is being asked to be Man #1. I think he'll get there one day. But right now, I just hope it doesn't wreck his confidence. He had another bad game, but I don't think he's a bad player.

I agree with most of this. Perry might be defensive MVP so far. I like Jon and Ponch. They are playing well. The won't be Navarro Bowman, but you can win with those two guys. Starks might be done. Same with Peppers. Makes me wish we had signed Spiller to give us an element of speed. Randall will bounce back, but I'm really hoping Shields makes it back and stays healthy for the rest of the year. I haven't heard much about Lane Taylor. That's a good thing. Ha Ha has been a bit of a disappointment the last two games, but some of it might be that these secondary guys haven't played enough with each other (so many young guys playing) that it will take some time for them to get on the same page.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I think James Starks is done. He's been a good change of pace back since 2010, but I think he's pretty much given everything he can with nothing left.

Ya, he looks like a guy playing in an NFL alumni charity game. I was happy when Starks was resigned since I am a JS sniffer. But next came a sinking feeling, I wondered whether Starks had anything left, and I feared that TT had a stroke.

[pbmax]

Pete Dougherty ‏@PeteDougherty 42m42 minutes ago
Also, @BobMcGinn identifies an unsung hero who was key to the Packers' win over Detroit http://pck.rs/2dbnRYo via @PGpackersnews

HINT: Its Nick Perry.

Do they think we don't watch the game? Its not like Perry was doing well dealing with an influence block. He was pressuring the QB. He was mentioned on the broadcast. He was a first round pick.

[hoosier]

Pete Dougherty ‏@PeteDougherty 42m42 minutes ago
Also, @BobMcGinn identifies an unsung hero who was key to the Packers' win over Detroit http://pck.rs/2dbnRYo via @PGpackersnews

HINT: Its Nick Perry.

Do they think we don't watch the game? Its not like Perry was doing well dealing with an influence block. He was pressuring the QB. He was mentioned on the broadcast. He was a first round pick.

Fuckdoggle!!!

[red]

the more worrisome thing if starks is done, is why would he keep taking snaps from lacy, and why do we not have another RB on the roster?

and no, a WR in the backfield doesn't count, cause that never works

quit with the one series for one guy and another series for the other. this is probably eddys last year in green and gold, why not just use him as the bell cow and run him into the ground?

[Rutnstrut]

the more worrisome thing if starks is done, is why would he keep taking snaps from lacy, and why do we not have another RB on the roster?

and no, a WR in the backfield doesn't count, cause that never works

quit with the one series for one guy and another series for the other. this is probably eddys last year in green and gold, why not just use him as the bell cow and run him into the ground?

Because that's how stubby wants to do it. Big deal if it doesn't work, he'll do it his way.

[RashanGary]

Nick Perry, Daniels and Matthews give us an elite pass rushing trio!
We need shields back
Can't wait for Pennel and Guion to be back in the fold. Clark is ok, but will benefit by having lower snaps his rookie year
Having Nelson back is a big deal
young Lacy didn't remind me of Bettis, but now he does. I'm a big lacy fan right now
Teams seem to give us the slant. AR just needs to take it consistently.
OL looks good, three weeks in a row.
I never thought I'd say it, but I miss Burnett. He helps glue it all together

The Packers look good. Let's go another three or four weeks, hope for some health breaks and see if we evolve into a contender.
Nothing (besides shields possibly being done for his career) makes me think we're not poised for a run.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Nothing (besides shields possibly being done for his career) makes me think we're not poised for a run.

me too