Packers Have Found a Punter

[pbmax]

http://www.packersnews.com/story/spo...ies/740521001/

Vogel has punted 19 times through the first four games with a gross average of 45.9 yards and a net average of 43.5 yards, which ranks eighth in the league. Both of those numbers exceed the franchise records held by Masthay, whose best gross average was 45.6 yards in 2011 and whose best net average was 40.2 yards in 2015, his final year with the team. As for Schum, his gross average of 43.2 yards and net average of 39.1 yards ranked 27th and 24th in the league, respectively, last season.

“I feel great,” Vogel said. “Obviously it’s been exciting, the whole process. Definitely played well in most of the games. I think it’s a good start to the season. Obviously you don’t know how it’s all going to go when the season gets underway. I think I’m off to a strong foot and I just have to keep momentum going.”

Equally as impressive is Vogel’s average hang time of 4.67 seconds, which obliterates the numbers posted by Schum (4.25 seconds) and Masthay (4.09 seconds) in their most recent seasons in Green Bay.

[pbmax]

vince noted in another thread that the Packers are top 8 in scoring while 16th in yards. Having good special teams makes this possible.

Which leads to a question, would the best team (not offense, but team) ever for scoring points be 1st in points and average or below average in yards?

[vince]

vince noted in another thread that the Packers are top 8 in scoring while 16th in yards. Having good special teams makes this possible.

Which leads to a question, would the best team (not offense, but team) ever for scoring points be 1st in points and average or below average in yards?

I'd say that would happen if a team's defense and special teams consistently controlled field position more effectively than the rest of the league, so yeah that's an interesting point.

Bears game is a case-in-point. 35 points, dominant 21-point win, not a lot of yardage gained/needed as a result of field position dominance.

[pbmax]

I'd say that would happen if a team's defense and special teams consistently controlled field position more effectively than the rest of the league, so yeah that's an interesting point.

Bears game is a case-in-point. 35 points, dominant 21-point win, not a lot of yardage gained/needed as a result of field position dominance.

That was sorta how the 1996 Packer offense operated. LOTs of short fields.

[vince]

Good thread PB. Vogel's effectiveness has been underappreciated by just about all of us I'd say.

Field position is such an underrated stat by most. Where a drive starts from dramatically impacts scoring rate.

Bears-Packers Game

Successful Drives....Starting FP
Packers...5 (50%)...Opp. 48
Bears......2 (18%)...Own 29

Failed Drives.......Starting FP
Packers...5 (50%)....Own 18
Bears......9 (82%)....Own 26

The Packers were 1 for 6 when forced to go 70+ yards. They were 4 for 4 with 65 or less yds. More short fields and high success made the difference.

The Bears were 2 for 8 when they had to go 70+ yards. They were 0 for 3 with 65 or less yds. Fewer short fields and not capitalizing was their nemesis.

The stark difference in gaining shorter field scoring opportunities, and the execution in those situations resulted in a blowout on the scoreboard while the Bears won time of possession and outgained the Packers by over 20%.

That's all pretty obvious stuff I know but the impact of field position - and capitalizing on opportunities they present - is huge.

[mraynrand]

Which leads to a question, would the best team (not offense, but team) ever for scoring points be 1st in points and average or below average in yards?

Did you have a team in mind? The Broncos (2013?) I think score the record 600+ points but had about 20th ranked defense. They also were number one in yards. Some of those great defenses of the 80's - the Giants and Bears I think scored well for that era just because they got the ball so much in good field postion, but the '85 Bears offense was nothing to write home to Mother about. Giants maybe in '86 in Phil Simms hot year might just fit the description. I didn't bother to look anything up.

[mraynrand]

That was sorta how the 1996 Packer offense operated. LOTs of short fields.

Yep. Think about the NFCC game against Carolina. Favre gave up a pick six and fumbled leading to a FG. Packers defense 'allowed' ten points. A great defense can make an offense having a marginal day look tremendous.

[gbgary]

https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/Vjnp...7/gbpunt.0.gif

[pbmax]

https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/Vjnp...7/gbpunt.0.gif

Not within 2 feet of touching that ball.

Though I love the Bear immediately saying it was tipped. Heady play there you bastard.

[vince]

That 59 yard bomb by Vogel from Packers' 28 - with big hangtime to allow Janis to cover for no return (gunner extraordinaire) - backed the Boys up to their own 12 (far and away their worst starting field position all day), was immediately followed (after a stuffed run on 1st down) by the pick 6 to retake the lead in the 4th Q.

The Packers have found a punter.

Now let's work on the holding for Crosby part of the job.

[texaspackerbacker]

I hope nobody turns against him because of one messed up hold for Crosby. He's been good otherwise there too.

[Pugger]

I hope nobody turns against him because of one messed up hold for Crosby. He's been good otherwise there too.

After that messed up hold Mason didn't miss again yesterday.

[pbmax]

That 59 yard bomb by Vogel from Packers' 28 - with big hangtime to allow Janis to cover for no return (gunner extraordinaire) - backed the Boys up to their own 12 (far and away their worst starting field position all day), was immediately followed (after a stuffed run on 1st down) by the pick 6 to retake the lead in the 4th Q.

The Packers have found a punter.

Now let's work on the holding for Crosby part of the job.

That punt was magnificent. If Zook drew up the perfect punt on paper, for depth and hang time, it would be a picture of that punt. Directionally it was on target as you could see Janis streaking straight down the left the entire time and Jones cutting to the left from his right side gunner position.

He did not respond well to two snaps that were in completely different spots. The first snap was high and inside (probably the better of the two) and he set it short of his target, leading to a kick that sailed right.

The second was low and inside after Vogel had probably expected something higher. He never got a clean handle on it.

TAYBOR™ has got to be more consistent. If you miss, it still needs to be in a certain frame so the holder has a shot to adjust.

[mraynrand]

TAYBOR™ has got to be more consistent. If you miss, it still needs to be in a certain frame so the holder has a shot to adjust.

Didn't Jim Nance call Lane Taylor "TAYBOR™" the other night? Am I allowed to use TAYBOR™ for Lane Taylor? I need a Packerrats ruling on this.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Didn't Jim Nance call Lane Taylor "TAYBOR™" the other night? Am I allowed to use TAYBOR™ for Lane Taylor? I need a Packerrats ruling on this.

Not allowed, unless you say "Fuckin' TABOR."

[pbmax]

Didn't Jim Nance call Lane Taylor "TAYBOR™" the other night? Am I allowed to use TAYBOR™ for Lane Taylor? I need a Packerrats ruling on this.

I think anyone who might be called up to long snap can take on the mantle of TAYBOR™. Sorta a Green Lantern or Thor kinda thing.

[smuggler]

Was the hold really all that bad? The snap was low and he got it down. Just not in time to keep Crosby's timing in tact.

[pbmax]

Was the hold really all that bad? The snap was low and he got it down. Just not in time to keep Crosby's timing in tact.

If the ball is set on a spot Crosby has not targeted as he begins to move, all sorts of funky things happen. The spot was bad on the first, the timing hurt on the second I believe.

Think about moving the golf ball as you backswing a golf club.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Think about moving the golf ball as you backswing a golf club.

Happens all the time to me. You get used to it, believe me.

[pbmax]

Happens all the time to me. You get used to it, believe me.

Is it the dizziness or bi-focals doing that to you?