8 in the box vs. GB offensive line

[GoPackGo]

The GB offensive line might be in for a rude awakening this year. Favre's experience and elusiveness masked the shortfallings of the Oline. Teams will stack 8 in the box until Rodgers proves he can beat them with the pass. Are we doomed to a long year of watching Grant's rushing opportunities take a step back while Rodgers struggles to get the pass going?

[Tony Oday]

I WOULD LOVE 8 guys in the box against Rogers he would put up MVP numbers with our WR corp and Donald Lee. I say bring it!

[MJZiggy]

That's what I'm saying too. Isn't that what Dallas tried that almost cost them the game against us last year? Or did Rodgers simply come in and outplay them from the pocket?

[Joemailman]

8 in the box will work against a rookie who doesn't really know what he is doing. It will sometimes work against a team that doesn't have the receivers to be a threat downfield. It can work against a weak-armed QB who can't get the ball downfield. I don't think any of these situations apply to the Packers.

[bobblehead]

you know I have been reading message boards for about 6 years now, and I am amazed at how many people think every pick favre threw was a wrong route and every productive player on the team was only a by-product of favre greatness.

Note to all....that line wasn't THAT bad last year. I admit, a young QB will probably take a few more sacks this year, but I'm willing to bet the total will still be under 25.

[ahaha]

If a team thought it was going against a bad o-line and could get pressure with the front four, it would pretty stupid to put 8 guys in the box.

[Packnut]

8 in the box would be commiting defensive suicide against our 5 wide set. It will very seldom happen if at all. Rodgers has had ample time to learn and he learned from the master.

It's unfortunate that Sherman never had the brains to get quality WR's and go 4 or 5 wide. Favre would have not just broken records, but rather shattered them. It's also a shame Teddy waited until the end, but better late than never...............

[Partial]

The GB offensive line might be in for a rude awakening this year. Favre's experience and elusiveness masked the shortfallings of the Oline. Teams will stack 8 in the box until Rodgers proves he can beat them with the pass. Are we doomed to a long year of watching Grant's rushing opportunities take a step back while Rodgers struggles to get the pass going?

It is what I suspect will happen.

[Patler]

It's unfortunate that Sherman never had the brains to get quality WR's and go 4 or 5 wide. Favre would have not just broken records, but rather shattered them. It's also a shame Teddy waited until the end, but better late than never...............

Waited until the end? How did he wait until the end?

By drafting Murphy, Jennings and Jones in successive years in the only drafts he had while Favre was on the team?
By drafting additional receivers in the 6th and 4th and 5th rounds of those same three drafts?
By going out and finding Lee in his first season in GB?
By signing a WR in the first season who had been the 15th pick in the draft? By signing a WR the second season who had been a 9th pick in the draft?
By drafting a TE and signing numerous undrafted FA tight ends?

He had only three seasons with Favre, and worked at giving him better receivers each and every one of those seasons. Just when and how did he wait??????

[Patler]

It's unfortunate that Sherman never had the brains to get quality WR's and go 4 or 5 wide.


I think Sherman did try to go with 4 and 5 WRs, the only problem was the "receiver" he brought in all those times was Kevin Barry! :lol: :lol:

[Packnut]

It's unfortunate that Sherman never had the brains to get quality WR's and go 4 or 5 wide. Favre would have not just broken records, but rather shattered them. It's also a shame Teddy waited until the end, but better late than never...............

Waited until the end? How did he wait until the end?

By drafting Murphy, Jennings and Jones in successive years in the only drafts he had while Favre was on the team?
By drafting additional receivers in the 6th and 4th and 5th rounds of those same three drafts?
By going out and finding Lee in his first season in GB?
By signing a WR in the first season who had been the 15th pick in the draft? By signing a WR the second season who had been a 9th pick in the draft?
By drafting a TE and signing numerous undrafted FA tight ends?

He had only three seasons with Favre, and worked at giving him better receivers each and every one of those seasons. Just when and how did he wait??????

There was a FA named Owens. May-be you've heard of him????????? There was a guy named Moss who set all kinds of freakin records there for the taking before last season. Both played for a reasonable amount of cash and would'nt have broken the bank. Both PRODUCE results.

There was also a guy named Welker who had one helluva season, also a FA. I could go on and name a few more but I think you get the point.

And please all of you "personality" fanatics spare me the constant refrain of they are not "Packer people". The NFL to me is about winning plain and simple. Screw the baggage crap cause in the end the ONLY thing that counts is winning.

[Packnut]

Oh and one last point because I'm sure I'll hear the other popular refrain around here about building for the future. The NFL is a crap-shoot at best. Favre said it himself before the championship game about how hard it is to get there and how ya just might never get back.

Favre proved what he could do with some talent last season. Just think about what he could have done with some grade A prime talent. I would have settled for loading up and getting a few SB's and then go on a 5yr rebuilding program.

[Lurker64]

There was also a guy named Welker who had one helluva season, also a FA. I could go on and name a few more but I think you get the point.

Welker was an RFA and not a UFA, the Pats gave up their 2007 2nd and 7th round picks to get him. By comparison, our 2007 2nd and 7th round picks were used to obtain Brandon Jackson, Aaron Rouse, and Korey Hall. It's not really as simple as "Should have signed Welker". I'm not saying that Jackson, Rouse, and Hall are necessarily better to have than Welker, but considering all those guys are young and still have upside the choice is somewhat ambiguous.

[Patler]

There was a FA named Owens. May-be you've heard of him????????? There was a guy named Moss who set all kinds of freakin records there for the taking before last season. Both played for a reasonable amount of cash and would'nt have broken the bank. Both PRODUCE results.

There was also a guy named Welker who had one helluva season, also a FA. I could go on and name a few more but I think you get the point.


But you stated "It's also a shame Teddy waited until the end, but better late than never..............." (Emphasis added.) You are implying that he did something early and is now doing something different. In fact, he did not wait, but has been very consistent.

I clearly do not get your references to various big name FAs. He still has not gone after them. He still follows his same course.

I think what TT has proven is that you can vastly upgrade a position without going after free agents that can provide risks of various sorts whether it be financial, health or personality.

[Fritz]

Oh and one last point because I'm sure I'll hear the other popular refrain around here about building for the future. The NFL is a crap-shoot at best. Favre said it himself before the championship game about how hard it is to get there and how ya just might never get back.

Favre proved what he could do with some talent last season. Just think about what he could have done with some grade A prime talent. I would have settled for loading up and getting a few SB's and then go on a 5yr rebuilding program.

Moss + Brady = Second place.

Owens + Romo = First round playoff loss.

And don't tell me, please, that Brady and Romo are journeyman QB's, and Favre, at the late stage of his career, was significantly better than either. Or that those two teams didn't have the talent to surround those QB's and receivers that the Packers had.

You make it appear that if TT had signed Moss or Owens, a SB would've been guaranteed. I do not agree.

[b bulldog]

aS THE gIANTS NOTED BEFORE THE NFC Championship game, they will stop the run and make the passing game beat them.

[texaspackerbacker]

I alluded to this 8 in the box thing--stopping the run first--in the poll on Rodgers TD passes thread.

I'm thinking that as teams do this, Rodgers gets off to a great start with a lot of TD passes. Then, when they go back to a little more normal coverage, Grant goes to work.

[Scott Campbell]

I've never heard 8 in the box referred to before as a way of pressuring the QB. It's typically to stuff a running game that can't otherwise be contained.

[Scott Campbell]

Oh and one last point because I'm sure I'll hear the other popular refrain around here about building for the future.



Well if 13-3 counts as building for the future, then I'm all for it.

I hardly think Moss, Welker or TO would have changed the outcome of that Giants game.

[Rastak]

I think with Green Bay's WR corps, 8 in the box is not in the cards for the early season. Unless the running game explodes right from the start ( could happen) or Rodgers is completely inept (Like T Jackson was for the first half of last year, which I doubt) then defenses would be stupid to stack the line. The Packers do have a great set of WR's and Nelson should make them even better. I look for teams to defend pass first vs Green Bay.

[vince]

I think with Green Bay's WR corps, 8 in the box is not in the cards for the early season. Unless the running game explodes right from the start ( could happen) or Rodgers is completely inept (Like T Jackson was for the first half of last year, which I doubt) then defenses would be stupid to stack the line. The Packers do have a great set of WR's and Nelson should make them even better. I look for teams to defend pass first vs Green Bay.
Agreed. Stacking the box would be a recipe for getting beat quickly against McCarthy's playbook. Rodgers, these receivers and McCarthy's pass-attacking playcalling can certainly beat three DB's with either/both quick passes and a lot of YAC and/or going over the top on the outside with any/all of Driver, Jennings, Nelson, Jones, Lee, Finley and even Martin with his size.

McCarthy has the personnel and offensive attack that gives the team the ability to dictate defenses and immediately force a defense to take the eighth man out of the box if he would choose to do so.

[b bulldog]

ARod will see a good variety of things. He is pretty green so DC will mix it up to try to confuse him.

[RashanGary]

It's going to be a VERY interesting year for sure. Rodgers didn't look the least bit confused or intimidated in the Dallas game. I thought they came right after him and pressured him even more than they did with Brett in. He didn't throw picks. He didn't panic. He got them back in it and almost won it if the defense wasn't a complete sieve that day.

Will he show that poise consistantly? Can he make those throws consistantly? If he plays like he played in Dallas, teams will be absolutely shredded (because most teams can't get there the way the Dallas front 7 can). If he's not good, the Packers really are doomed (at least for a year).

[Tarlam!]

ARod will see a good variety of things. He is pretty green so DC will mix it up to try to confuse him.

I recall when Big Ben came into the league, and Romo, that DCs had so little film to work with the QBs got pretty lucky. only later were they slowed down...

But as Scott pointed out, 8 in the box is specifically to stop the run, isn't it?

I see a shit load of blitzing coming up. A-Rod will need to have his release be quick and the TE better be able to block.

[Zool]

I think with Green Bay's WR corps, 8 in the box is not in the cards for the early season. Unless the running game explodes right from the start ( could happen) or Rodgers is completely inept (Like T Jackson was for the first half of last year, which I doubt) then defenses would be stupid to stack the line. The Packers do have a great set of WR's and Nelson should make them even better. I look for teams to defend pass first vs Green Bay.

Agreed. Teams will force the average run-blocking line to open holes for Grant. If you stack the box against an inexperienced and young QB, you might just give him some confidence. Confidence is huge in QB play. Just ask a young Favre.

[sharpe1027]

I see a shit load of blitzing coming up. A-Rod will need to have his release be quick and the TE better be able to block.

^ Agreed. I think that the interesting thing is that a lot of blitzing often leads to giving up the big runs.

[Deputy Nutz]

aS THE gIANTS NOTED BEFORE THE NFC Championship game, they will stop the run and make the passing game beat them.

when it is -6 degrees I think I could have came up with this game plan.

[Deputy Nutz]

I don't care if the QB is a 15 year veteran or a 1st year starter the easiest way for them to suceed is giving them single coverage against their wide outs and using linebackers in coverage.

Rodgers is going to be a much smarter qb going into his first year as a starter than Favre was. Granted Rodgers has had three years to watch and learn, but Favre was horrible against the blitz his first two years. He couldn't figure it out. He wasn't very good at reading defenses and got by on his pure talent. When Favre put it all together he became the best player in the game for at least 3 years in a row.

Rodgers did well in his limited playing time against a very active Cowboys defense. Unfortunately good or bad this game was only 3 quarters of football and to point to the game as evidence that Rodgers will be a great qb is just foolish.

So stacking the box against Rodgers is probably going to be a mistake, McCarthy allows his QBs to call audibles, and hopefully Rodgers will have a very good grasp on the offensive scheme.

[Deputy Nutz]

One other thing, if an opposing defensive coordinator sees the Packers bring 4 or 5 receivers onto the field and still loads the box with 8 defenders should be splashed with gasoline and lit on fire.

[Zool]

One other thing, if an opposing defensive coordinator sees the Packers bring 4 or 5 receivers onto the field and still loads the box with 8 defenders should be splashed with gasoline and lit on fire.

Yeah were is Slowvik now?

[The Leaper]

I see a shit load of blitzing coming up. A-Rod will need to have his release be quick and the TE better be able to block.

That is why I suspect we will see more 4 and 5 WR sets in 2008...as McCarthy will utilize the spread to keep the defense more honest, especially in terms of rushing the passer. While it will expose Rodgers a bit more to pressure in the case of breakdowns, it will also expose the defense more to Rodgers' scrambling ability...something Favre hasn't had in 6-8 years.

[b bulldog]

Actually Nutz you are correct but a good D will always try to make a team one dimensional no matter what the weather is and if you can stop the run, you have a decent chance at making the offense commit mistakes.

[Deputy Nutz]

Actually Nutz you are correct but a good D will always try to make a team one dimensional no matter what the weather is and if you can stop the run, you have a decent chance at making the offense commit mistakes.

The key to most defensive schemes is to first take away the run. The key to a good defense will always be their run stopping ability. It takes more talent and guts from a defense. To stop the pass a coordinator worth his salt can scheme to do that regardless if his secondary is weak on talent, example, New York Giants, their secondary was not what I considered strong going into playoffs, but they schemed their asses off, and the players performed.

[Bretsky]

Actually Nutz you are correct but a good D will always try to make a team one dimensional no matter what the weather is and if you can stop the run, you have a decent chance at making the offense commit mistakes.

The key to most defensive schemes is to first take away the run. The key to a good defense will always be their run stopping ability. It takes more talent and guts from a defense. To stop the pass a coordinator worth his salt can scheme to do that regardless if his secondary is weak on talent, example, New York Giants, their secondary was not what I considered strong going into playoffs, but they schemed their asses off, and the players performed.


Defensive Coordinator for the NG Giants did a wonderful job creating opportunistic schemes and disguising blitzes/stunts to create some confusion against the Cowboys, Packers, and Patriots.

Great job by that DC

Hopefully Sanders can learn something from him

[The Leaper]

To stop the pass a coordinator worth his salt can scheme to do that regardless if his secondary is weak on talent, example, New York Giants, their secondary was not what I considered strong going into playoffs, but they schemed their asses off, and the players performed.

Sure Nutz...and a dominant DL where you could pressure the QB just rushing 4 guys had NOTHING to do with it. It was all schemes, smoke and mirrors.

The only reason the Giants could scheme like they did was because of a ridiculously talented front 4 which is nearly impossible to assemble in the NFL. You can't sit on short routes if your DL can't create pressure on the QB.

[Deputy Nutz]

To stop the pass a coordinator worth his salt can scheme to do that regardless if his secondary is weak on talent, example, New York Giants, their secondary was not what I considered strong going into playoffs, but they schemed their asses off, and the players performed.

Sure Nutz...and a dominant DL where you could pressure the QB just rushing 4 guys had NOTHING to do with it. It was all schemes, smoke and mirrors.

The only reason the Giants could scheme like they did was because of a ridiculously talented front 4 which is nearly impossible to assemble in the NFL. You can't sit on short routes if your DL can't create pressure on the QB.

If they got all that pressure with the front four than the few posters that claimed it was done with a great blitz package were wrong?

Ok Leaper let me prove my point again using your post, the front four could pin their ears back and go after the passer because the running game was a nonfactor in the second half of the ball game because they shut it done in the 1st half. The Packers were moving the ball well in the 1st half without an effective running game because the Giants were still respecting the Packers ability to run the football. The second half not so much, the front four pass rushers along with blitzers were able to focus on getting to Favre and disrupting the passing game. The defensive coordinator could now scheme to stop the pass on the majority of plays in the second half.