Article - The Eye in the Sky

[MJZiggy]

Trouble on the Horizon

by Eric Baranczyk

This is the second week in a row the Packers offensive line has demonstrated...Read the rest! (http://www.packerrats.com)

[Joemailman]

Well, I haven't studied things as much as Eric has. However, when Ryan Grant has 15 rushes for 20 yards, and the other 2 guys have 8 rushes for 80 yards, I wonder how much of the problems running the ball have to do with the offensive line.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Well, I haven't studied things as much as Eric has. However, when Ryan Grant has 15 rushes for 20 yards, and the other 2 guys have 8 rushes for 80 yards, I wonder how much of the problems running the ball have to do with the offensive line.

A lot.

[boiga]

Wow, great article, Eric. It's great to have some educated analysis on the players who don't get as much press attention. It's extremely comforting to hear that Cole is performing consistently considering our limited depth at DT.

About the offensive line, who isn't performing on running downs and who is? Colledge last year was a horrible in the run game, but my impression so far this year is that while he hasn't been consistent, he is much improved. There is no way he could have made that block on Williams for the Rodgers QB sneak last year. Is Spitz better at center or at right guard? Is Moll be the weak link? And how much will Wells' return this Sunday improve the run blocking?


Well, I haven't studied things as much as Eric has. However, when Ryan Grant has 15 rushes for 20 yards, and the other 2 guys have 8 rushes for 80 yards, I wonder how much of the problems running the ball have to do with the offensive line. What Eric said was that our run game was successful on stunts, but we couldn't run up the middle when we needed to. The difference is that when Grant was in the backfield, the Lions expected the run. Why would they think we would rely on a guy named Lumpkin when the game was on the line in the 4th quarter?

Lumpkin and Bjack caught them unawares. Grant ran into their waiting arms. We need to be capable of busting through even when they know it's coming. That's the O-Line's job.

[pbmax]

Phenomenal article Eric, thank you. I post this assuming he might be responding. Otherwise ignore my questions.

Two things. Goal line versus Vikings on Rodgers sneak. Both Colledge and Spitz seemed to get a push. Colledge got Pat Williams (I think it was Pat) moving to the offense's right and back. I couldn't believe my eyes on the replay, but it happened. When Spitz held the center-guard gap, it gave Rodgers a clear path to the end zone.

I did notice Colledge's pad level was higher than Williams, at least at the shoulders. Does this mean Colledge is that strong or did Williams take himself out of the play?

Item two: Do you think the inconsistency is the reason Barbre got some reps in the Lions game and both Sitton and Wells are being discussed (at least in the papers) as possible starters on their return?

Thanks again.

[Lurker64]

I'm wondering how much of the troubles we're having here come from having sort of a patchwork offensive line due to injuries to two guys we were counting on for this year. Though Spitz seems like he might be better at C than Wells in terms of "controlling the line of scrimmage" (Spitz is bigger, and seems stronger and more of a brawler), would having an interior of "Spitz Wells (Colledge/Sitton/Moll/Barbre)" help more?

There's really nothing to be done right now about the fact that we don't appear to have good ZBS tackles (Clifton is world class at pass blocking, but he doesn't cut off backside pressure like we probably need them to.)

I'm sort of afraid that, until Clifton retires (a sad day for Packer fans and especially Aaron Rodgers), we're not going to be all that effective at running the ball.

[mission]

Great article.. was disappointed at the end actually.

Ryan Pickett really IS the unsung hero of this team... I'd say Hawk but it's hard for a #5 to go without notice. 79 is a man beast.. like two of them

[Bretsky]

Great article; on D they can't afford to lose Pickett. Good of MM to rest him and get him better during the preseason.

On the Run Offense, this is spot on. Hopefully it will get better

[sheepshead]

For anyone that watches the position more than me or has played it, what are the fundamental issues with guys that can pass block better than anyone and are not quite as good (so far) at run blocking?

[texaspackerbacker]

The article is true about lack of consistently controlling the line of scrimmage. I would suggest, though, these days, no offensive line is all that consistent in that kind of control. The defenses have too much talent, but more than that, there are a bunch of schemes and games that D Lines play which defeat the O Line push as often as not.

And while the claim of lack of consistency may be valid, it is just as true that the O Line has been overall very successful at getting the job done. Get Grant healthy, and suddenly our O Line will seem a lot better. As it is, with a lame Grant and a healthy but not quite as good Brandon Jackson, they STILL are doing enough with the running game that Rodgers can pass without facing all out ignore-the-run type rush and coverage.

And yes, Hawk IS maturing and coming through big time. Part of that, however, is due to some intelligent role reversal by our much-maligned Bob Sanders. He has Hawk--who is more physical--doing more physical stuff against the run and blitzing, while Nick Barnett--who is probably more mobile--dropping into coverage more. Last year it was the other way around, and I, for one, think this year's way is working better.

[sheepshead]

Tex, that's kind of where I was going. It takes a healthy NFL running back to gain yards in the NFL , no matter how big the holes are.

[Guiness]

Good read about the OL.

I'm not an OL guy, and know even less about how to run the ZBS, so I don't know what you can do about a problem like he describes. Seems to me though that with the WR corp we have, and an RB who is prone to breaking the long one, the answer is to go pass heavy like we did in the past, and do a lot of play action. Get the D co-ord thinking nickel packages on first down, and the run game will come.

[Cleft Crusty]

Although Cleft Crusty is not one to question playcalling, I have to wonder if Eric thinks that the O-line is superior at pass protection, then possibly one way to open up the running game is to go against tendencies, passing on running downs, and running in passing situation, to a certain extent. The Packers seemed to telegraph the run somewhat against Detroit. The second related point would be to recognize that if the pass is working, you don't need to run the ball. Force the defense to stop your pass and the running lanes ought to open up. Still, Eric is right: the actual, individual blocking must improve.

[Goat]

Great responses, it is nice to talk with educated people.

Here is the deal with the OL that makes my skin crawl. How can they continue to waste draft picks and can't get anyone to block. Christ just get in the way once and awhile. They are never going to be 100% but if you can get 75% that is pretty good.

They make the same mistakes over and over and never seem to be able to learn. My blame at this time has to fall on Coach Campen's shoulders. He sees the same thing we do...

As far as running backs go, put LT, Bryant Westbrook, or AP on the Packers and their production will fall. YOU need to be able to run and if there is ZERO daylight and no where to cut back (even in NICKEL) then you might as well pass it all day and thumb your nose at the D. Run 3-4 wides and keep your best blocking back in and throw. forget about even trying to run. run a draw in the fourth quarter and call it a day!

Don't confuse the ability of the Backs to make a big play as a successful running game. That shows the back have talent. BJack and the rest. There is no where to run. Imagine if they could get some movement on 75% of their running plays what kind of sick yards those backs would put up... The backs aren't the problem. Take away all runs over 20 yards and where are you?? if you average 2 yards a carry and rely on the explosive play, you end up watching the super bowl like last year.

We will see sunday, if they are ready to step it up. If they could run consistantly, on sunday the Lions never make the comeback. Thank god for Benzcain and Charles Woodson or it could have be shameful.

-the EYE in the SKY!

[boiga]

Welcome to the forum Goat. (you are Eric, right?)

If you were Campen, what would you do to rectify the situation? Is the problem personnel, system, or individual mental errors?

If personnel is the issue, how would Wells and Sitton effect this equation?

I agree that there is a problem here. It seems the only way to gain 1 yard is the recently rediscovered QB sneak. Can these guys improve or do we need to overhaul the system?

[Bossman641]

I wish we could just point to one guy and say he is the reason for the running game not working, but unfortunately it is all of them. The tackles have never been great at cutting off the backside, and the guards and center too often get throw right back in the backfield. They all can do it, but not consistently, and when you spread that inconsistency across 5 different players it is tough to get any kind of running game going.

I'm starting to warm up to Harlan's (?) idea of Colledge, Spitz, Sitton in the middle just so we have some strength in there.

Just once I would like to see them run for 4-5 yards at a time down after down. Instead we get 1,1,2,-1, 3, 0, 7, 2, 0, 34, 3, 6, 2.

Isn't the goal of the ZBS to get at least 2-3 yards every play? I think I remember Jagz saying that a few years back. By that scorecard, the running game fails way too often.

[SkinBasket]

Is Tootie Robbins dead yet?

[texaspackerbacker]

Great responses, it is nice to talk with educated people.

Here is the deal with the OL that makes my skin crawl. How can they continue to waste draft picks and can't get anyone to block. Christ just get in the way once and awhile. They are never going to be 100% but if you can get 75% that is pretty good.

They make the same mistakes over and over and never seem to be able to learn. My blame at this time has to fall on Coach Campen's shoulders. He sees the same thing we do...

As far as running backs go, put LT, Bryant Westbrook, or AP on the Packers and their production will fall. YOU need to be able to run and if there is ZERO daylight and no where to cut back (even in NICKEL) then you might as well pass it all day and thumb your nose at the D. Run 3-4 wides and keep your best blocking back in and throw. forget about even trying to run. run a draw in the fourth quarter and call it a day!

Don't confuse the ability of the Backs to make a big play as a successful running game. That shows the back have talent. BJack and the rest. There is no where to run. Imagine if they could get some movement on 75% of their running plays what kind of sick yards those backs would put up... The backs aren't the problem. Take away all runs over 20 yards and where are you?? if you average 2 yards a carry and rely on the explosive play, you end up watching the super bowl like last year.

We will see sunday, if they are ready to step it up. If they could run consistantly, on sunday the Lions never make the comeback. Thank god for Benzcain and Charles Woodson or it could have be shameful.

-the EYE in the SKY!

I strongly disagree with your doom and gloom outlook about the Packers O Line, Goat.

Combine your line about Westbrook and Peterson performing worse with the Packers O Line with the FACT that Ryan Grant outgained both of them--and everybody else too--after becoming the starter last season, and it amounts to saying Grant is better--a lot better--than either Peterson or Westbrook. I doubt that is what you mean to say, but put 2 and 2 together, and that's what you get.

I think all things considered, this O Line is doing the job. You actually don't want to give the line credit for those gaping holes that result in runs over 20 yards/long gains in general? I'll take 100 yards gained in the form of 24 two yard gains and one 52 yard TD run over 100 yards in the form of 25 consistent four yard runs anytime.

[Bretsky]

Great responses, it is nice to talk with educated people.

Here is the deal with the OL that makes my skin crawl. How can they continue to waste draft picks and can't get anyone to block. Christ just get in the way once and awhile. They are never going to be 100% but if you can get 75% that is pretty good.

They make the same mistakes over and over and never seem to be able to learn. My blame at this time has to fall on Coach Campen's shoulders. He sees the same thing we do...

As far as running backs go, put LT, Bryant Westbrook, or AP on the Packers and their production will fall. YOU need to be able to run and if there is ZERO daylight and no where to cut back (even in NICKEL) then you might as well pass it all day and thumb your nose at the D. Run 3-4 wides and keep your best blocking back in and throw. forget about even trying to run. run a draw in the fourth quarter and call it a day!

Don't confuse the ability of the Backs to make a big play as a successful running game. That shows the back have talent. BJack and the rest. There is no where to run. Imagine if they could get some movement on 75% of their running plays what kind of sick yards those backs would put up... The backs aren't the problem. Take away all runs over 20 yards and where are you?? if you average 2 yards a carry and rely on the explosive play, you end up watching the super bowl like last year.

We will see sunday, if they are ready to step it up. If they could run consistantly, on sunday the Lions never make the comeback. Thank god for Benzcain and Charles Woodson or it could have be shameful.

-the EYE in the SKY!

I strongly disagree with your doom and gloom outlook about the Packers O Line, Goat.

Combine your line about Westbrook and Peterson performing worse with the Packers O Line with the FACT that Ryan Grant outgained both of them--and everybody else too--after becoming the starter last season, and it amounts to saying Grant is better--a lot better--than either Peterson or Westbrook. I doubt that is what you mean to say, but put 2 and 2 together, and that's what you get.

I think all things considered, this O Line is doing the job. You actually don't want to give the line credit for those gaping holes that result in runs over 20 yards/long gains in general? I'll take 100 yards gained in the form of 24 two yard gains and one 52 yard TD run over 100 yards in the form of 25 consistent four yard runs anytime.

the comparison being made is just for this season. Our QB was pretty hot last year when teams started playing the pass and that allowed Grant to get a great jump start. Then they succeeded together and provided a nice balance. MM did a great job keeping teams off balance as well.

This year our OL has been inconsistent at best blocking for the run. Maybe they are just athletic pass blockers who are not strong enough. Maybe they don't fit the scheme well enough, and maybe they just need to improve.

But they have not been good this year.

[HarveyWallbangers]

But they have not been good this year.

I don't know. Minnesota's run defense is STOUT. They held Joseph Addai to 20 yards on 15 carries, so I tend to think we actually did pretty well against them.

I knew Detroit would be fired up to play better run defense. Kind of sell the farm against the run--which I think they did in the first half. So, I'm not surprised we only gained 120 rushing yards against them.

Considering the OL has been in flux for most of training camp and the season because of injuries, I think they've done just fine.

Hell, we had a much worse start in run blocking last season. I feel pretty good about the OL. I think Spitz is emerging as a solid starter and Colledge seems to be improved. If Sitton is the real deal, then I think we have the makings of a good unit.

I just hope Clifton and Tauscher aren't falling off at the same time as our interior OL is getting better. I don't think so yet, but a couple more games like Detroit and I'll be worried.

[texaspackerbacker]

Great responses, it is nice to talk with educated people.

Here is the deal with the OL that makes my skin crawl. How can they continue to waste draft picks and can't get anyone to block. Christ just get in the way once and awhile. They are never going to be 100% but if you can get 75% that is pretty good.

They make the same mistakes over and over and never seem to be able to learn. My blame at this time has to fall on Coach Campen's shoulders. He sees the same thing we do...

As far as running backs go, put LT, Bryant Westbrook, or AP on the Packers and their production will fall. YOU need to be able to run and if there is ZERO daylight and no where to cut back (even in NICKEL) then you might as well pass it all day and thumb your nose at the D. Run 3-4 wides and keep your best blocking back in and throw. forget about even trying to run. run a draw in the fourth quarter and call it a day!

Don't confuse the ability of the Backs to make a big play as a successful running game. That shows the back have talent. BJack and the rest. There is no where to run. Imagine if they could get some movement on 75% of their running plays what kind of sick yards those backs would put up... The backs aren't the problem. Take away all runs over 20 yards and where are you?? if you average 2 yards a carry and rely on the explosive play, you end up watching the super bowl like last year.

We will see sunday, if they are ready to step it up. If they could run consistantly, on sunday the Lions never make the comeback. Thank god for Benzcain and Charles Woodson or it could have be shameful.

-the EYE in the SKY!

I strongly disagree with your doom and gloom outlook about the Packers O Line, Goat.

Combine your line about Westbrook and Peterson performing worse with the Packers O Line with the FACT that Ryan Grant outgained both of them--and everybody else too--after becoming the starter last season, and it amounts to saying Grant is better--a lot better--than either Peterson or Westbrook. I doubt that is what you mean to say, but put 2 and 2 together, and that's what you get.

I think all things considered, this O Line is doing the job. You actually don't want to give the line credit for those gaping holes that result in runs over 20 yards/long gains in general? I'll take 100 yards gained in the form of 24 two yard gains and one 52 yard TD run over 100 yards in the form of 25 consistent four yard runs anytime.

the comparison being made is just for this season. Our QB was pretty hot last year when teams started playing the pass and that allowed Grant to get a great jump start. Then they succeeded together and provided a nice balance. MM did a great job keeping teams off balance as well.

This year our OL has been inconsistent at best blocking for the run. Maybe they are just athletic pass blockers who are not strong enough. Maybe they don't fit the scheme well enough, and maybe they just need to improve.

But they have not been good this year.

The comparison may be just for this season, but it's mostly the same personnel, and there's no strong indication that they are playing any worse than last season. The only significant difference is Grant's injury--that plus the fact that Minnesota has a great reputation for run defense and Detroit was loading up against the run, basically daring Rodgers to beat them passing--which he did--with significant help from the O Line.

I just don't see any reason to disrespect the performance of the O Line after two very good overall offensive performances.

[sheepshead]

Great responses, it is nice to talk with educated people.

Here is the deal with the OL that makes my skin crawl. How can they continue to waste draft picks and can't get anyone to block. Christ just get in the way once and awhile. They are never going to be 100% but if you can get 75% that is pretty good.

They make the same mistakes over and over and never seem to be able to learn. My blame at this time has to fall on Coach Campen's shoulders. He sees the same thing we do...

As far as running backs go, put LT, Bryant Westbrook, or AP on the Packers and their production will fall. YOU need to be able to run and if there is ZERO daylight and no where to cut back (even in NICKEL) then you might as well pass it all day and thumb your nose at the D. Run 3-4 wides and keep your best blocking back in and throw. forget about even trying to run. run a draw in the fourth quarter and call it a day!

Don't confuse the ability of the Backs to make a big play as a successful running game. That shows the back have talent. BJack and the rest. There is no where to run. Imagine if they could get some movement on 75% of their running plays what kind of sick yards those backs would put up... The backs aren't the problem. Take away all runs over 20 yards and where are you?? if you average 2 yards a carry and rely on the explosive play, you end up watching the super bowl like last year.

We will see sunday, if they are ready to step it up. If they could run consistantly, on sunday the Lions never make the comeback. Thank god for Benzcain and Charles Woodson or it could have be shameful.

-the EYE in the SKY!

What team(nfl) is a good example of what you're talking about? Who can I watch? Also-do you have game films? I find it difficult to totally watch the OL especially when Arods in the shotgun.

Maybe I'm dumb, but I am not follow this actually.

[KYPack]

Great responses, it is nice to talk with educated people.

Here is the deal with the OL that makes my skin crawl. How can they continue to waste draft picks and can't get anyone to block. Christ just get in the way once and awhile. They are never going to be 100% but if you can get 75% that is pretty good.

They make the same mistakes over and over and never seem to be able to learn. My blame at this time has to fall on Coach Campen's shoulders. He sees the same thing we do...

As far as running backs go, put LT, Bryant Westbrook, or AP on the Packers and their production will fall. YOU need to be able to run and if there is ZERO daylight and no where to cut back (even in NICKEL) then you might as well pass it all day and thumb your nose at the D. Run 3-4 wides and keep your best blocking back in and throw. forget about even trying to run. run a draw in the fourth quarter and call it a day!

Don't confuse the ability of the Backs to make a big play as a successful running game. That shows the back have talent. BJack and the rest. There is no where to run. Imagine if they could get some movement on 75% of their running plays what kind of sick yards those backs would put up... The backs aren't the problem. Take away all runs over 20 yards and where are you?? if you average 2 yards a carry and rely on the explosive play, you end up watching the super bowl like last year.

We will see sunday, if they are ready to step it up. If they could run consistantly, on sunday the Lions never make the comeback. Thank god for Benzcain and Charles Woodson or it could have be shameful.

-the EYE in the SKY!

I strongly disagree with your doom and gloom outlook about the Packers O Line, Goat.

Combine your line about Westbrook and Peterson performing worse with the Packers O Line with the FACT that Ryan Grant outgained both of them--and everybody else too--after becoming the starter last season, and it amounts to saying Grant is better--a lot better--than either Peterson or Westbrook. I doubt that is what you mean to say, but put 2 and 2 together, and that's what you get.

I think all things considered, this O Line is doing the job. You actually don't want to give the line credit for those gaping holes that result in runs over 20 yards/long gains in general? I'll take 100 yards gained in the form of 24 two yard gains and one 52 yard TD run over 100 yards in the form of 25 consistent four yard runs anytime.

It ain't doom and gloom, Tex. It's reality. Eric is laying out for you the problem. The Packer interior Oline blocks well in pass pro. They are not getting the job done in the running game. Run blocking is basic. Engage, sustain, and finish the block. Our guard and center combo's engage the DLineman, but don't sustain or finish. IOW, they got no shove.

This problem is a carryover from last season. Last year, the Oline was rated the top pass pro line in the NFL by NFL Outsiders. They were near the bottom in run blocking and dead last in short yardage effectiveness. Those stats are a reflection of the lines' make-up. Our tackles are damn near the best tackles in the league. Cliffy and Tausch regularly shut out the leagues top DE's. DE's are normally most teams top pass rushers. We can get most teams pass rush blocked up. But we don't have a solid unit to establish a running game because we can't execute run blocks in the heart of the line.

There is a lot of light at the end of the tunnel. But right now, our interior line ain't getting the job done in blocking the run. That may change when Sitton and Wells (due to start against Dallas) get back, but right now, it ain't workin'.

[Fritz]

However, KY, I would add that the tackles - specifically Clifton - does seem to have a problem cutting off the backside pursuit. This means Grant is often cutting right back into a defender whom Clifton was unable to seal off.

[Zool]

However, KY, I would add that the tackles - specifically Clifton - does seem to have a problem cutting off the backside pursuit. This means Grant is often cutting right back into a defender whom Clifton was unable to seal off.

Same thing was said about Cliffy last year too. He doesnt like cutting too much. Prolly hates getting back up every play.

[texaspackerbacker]

Great responses, it is nice to talk with educated people.

Here is the deal with the OL that makes my skin crawl. How can they continue to waste draft picks and can't get anyone to block. Christ just get in the way once and awhile. They are never going to be 100% but if you can get 75% that is pretty good.

They make the same mistakes over and over and never seem to be able to learn. My blame at this time has to fall on Coach Campen's shoulders. He sees the same thing we do...

As far as running backs go, put LT, Bryant Westbrook, or AP on the Packers and their production will fall. YOU need to be able to run and if there is ZERO daylight and no where to cut back (even in NICKEL) then you might as well pass it all day and thumb your nose at the D. Run 3-4 wides and keep your best blocking back in and throw. forget about even trying to run. run a draw in the fourth quarter and call it a day!

Don't confuse the ability of the Backs to make a big play as a successful running game. That shows the back have talent. BJack and the rest. There is no where to run. Imagine if they could get some movement on 75% of their running plays what kind of sick yards those backs would put up... The backs aren't the problem. Take away all runs over 20 yards and where are you?? if you average 2 yards a carry and rely on the explosive play, you end up watching the super bowl like last year.

We will see sunday, if they are ready to step it up. If they could run consistantly, on sunday the Lions never make the comeback. Thank god for Benzcain and Charles Woodson or it could have be shameful.

-the EYE in the SKY!

I strongly disagree with your doom and gloom outlook about the Packers O Line, Goat.

Combine your line about Westbrook and Peterson performing worse with the Packers O Line with the FACT that Ryan Grant outgained both of them--and everybody else too--after becoming the starter last season, and it amounts to saying Grant is better--a lot better--than either Peterson or Westbrook. I doubt that is what you mean to say, but put 2 and 2 together, and that's what you get.

I think all things considered, this O Line is doing the job. You actually don't want to give the line credit for those gaping holes that result in runs over 20 yards/long gains in general? I'll take 100 yards gained in the form of 24 two yard gains and one 52 yard TD run over 100 yards in the form of 25 consistent four yard runs anytime.

It ain't doom and gloom, Tex. It's reality. Eric is laying out for you the problem. The Packer interior Oline blocks well in pass pro. They are not getting the job done in the running game. Run blocking is basic. Engage, sustain, and finish the block. Our guard and center combo's engage the DLineman, but don't sustain or finish. IOW, they got no shove.

This problem is a carryover from last season. Last year, the Oline was rated the top pass pro line in the NFL by NFL Outsiders. They were near the bottom in run blocking and dead last in short yardage effectiveness. Those stats are a reflection of the lines' make-up. Our tackles are damn near the best tackles in the league. Cliffy and Tausch regularly shut out the leagues top DE's. DE's are normally most teams top pass rushers. We can get most teams pass rush blocked up. But we don't have a solid unit to establish a running game because we can't execute run blocks in the heart of the line.

There is a lot of light at the end of the tunnel. But right now, our interior line ain't getting the job done in blocking the run. That may change when Sitton and Wells (due to start against Dallas) get back, but right now, it ain't workin'.

No! It's NOT reality. Reality is 13-3/14-4 last season and 2-0 with a new QB, with an ace RB playing hurt, against one very good team and one inspired home team.

Funny you should bring up last season. When I did that, somebody claimed it was irrelevant. That O Line--basically the same personnel as this year--merely allowed a totally unknown RB gain more yards than any other RB in the NFL for the weeks he started.

I wouldn't disagree with a word you wrote about the details of the blocking situation. Smaller more mobile ZBS O Linemen traditionally DON'T do as well in short yardage--although they sure came through in that Sneak on the goal line. Granted, Clifton and Tauscher are getting a little bit old, and maybe not quite getting there in certain situations. Last year, and his one big run this year, Grant didn't need that cut back.

I think this whole idea--knocking the performance of the O Line--is grasping at straws to knock a WINNING TEAM. It took a while for the Packers running game to kick in last season. With time--and a healthy Grant--it WILL do the job this season too--hopefully against the Cowboys. If it takes a little longer, well, it was unlikely we'd go unbeaten anyway, and they ARE the best opponent on the schedule.

So just enjoy the ride and don't try to dig up lame reasons to complain.

[mraynrand]

Is Tootie Robbins dead yet?

'I'm Not dead yet!'



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=grbSQ6O6kbs

[KYPack]

No! It's NOT reality. Reality is 13-3/14-4 last season and 2-0 with a new QB, with an ace RB playing hurt, against one very good team and one inspired home team.

Funny you should bring up last season. When I did that, somebody claimed it was irrelevant. That O Line--basically the same personnel as this year--merely allowed a totally unknown RB gain more yards than any other RB in the NFL for the weeks he started.

I wouldn't disagree with a word you wrote about the details of the blocking situation. Smaller more mobile ZBS O Linemen traditionally DON'T do as well in short yardage--although they sure came through in that Sneak on the goal line. Granted, Clifton and Tauscher are getting a little bit old, and maybe not quite getting there in certain situations. Last year, and his one big run this year, Grant didn't need that cut back.

I think this whole idea--knocking the performance of the O Line--is grasping at straws to knock a WINNING TEAM. It took a while for the Packers running game to kick in last season. With time--and a healthy Grant--it WILL do the job this season too--hopefully against the Cowboys. If it takes a little longer, well, it was unlikely we'd go unbeaten anyway, and they ARE the best opponent on the schedule.

So just enjoy the ride and don't try to dig up lame reasons to complain.

Well, we have a failure to communicate. I don't think pointing out weak areas in the Pack is knocking the team or anything else. What I (and "The Goat") are doing is observing and reporting. We've got a winning record in spite of an inability of our interior line to get runs blocked.

Sometimes I wonder if you watch the games. Every post from you seems to be "You rah, rah, sis boom bah, go Pack go!" & shit.

There isn't one complaint in my post. I ain't yelling, I'm telling.

We need to get some shove from our interior line (& the tackles, too) or we won't be a factor in big games and the play-offs. You must be able to win the alley fight to win the SB.

If you don't believe me, ask the Patriots if a smash mouth team can knock you off your pedastal. It's a goal that must be met & I'm posting the observation that we ain't there yet.

We might be in the future, but right now we are far short of being an effective run blocking line, especially in the interior, and especially in short yardage.

[KYPack]

However, KY, I would add that the tackles - specifically Clifton - does seem to have a problem cutting off the backside pursuit. This means Grant is often cutting right back into a defender whom Clifton was unable to seal off.



Yeah, you are right Fritz, I failed to mention that. I've always thought there might be another underlying problem. Personnel groups feed off & copy their leader. All our receivers play tough, run slants, and focus on YAC, etc., just like DD

Our Olineman excel at pass pro, but don't focus on their run blocks. The leaders of the line are Cliffy and Tausch.

One thing I've been hoping about is that one guy will rise up and become the interior road grader in short yardage that we lack. Maybe Sitton, Barbre, Spitz, I don't care, but some internal leader coming to the forefront could go a long way to helping our problem.

[Noodle]

KY, that is an excellent insight re the effect of position leaders on the makeup of the group. I hadn't thought about it, but what you say makes sense.

I wonder if Cliffy's chronic procedure penalties (he's been doing this for years) has also rubbed off on the young 'uns. You would certainly expect a tighter ship in this regard if the old dog on the line set the example and refused to tolerate stupid stuff like that.

[texaspackerbacker]

No! It's NOT reality. Reality is 13-3/14-4 last season and 2-0 with a new QB, with an ace RB playing hurt, against one very good team and one inspired home team.

Funny you should bring up last season. When I did that, somebody claimed it was irrelevant. That O Line--basically the same personnel as this year--merely allowed a totally unknown RB gain more yards than any other RB in the NFL for the weeks he started.

I wouldn't disagree with a word you wrote about the details of the blocking situation. Smaller more mobile ZBS O Linemen traditionally DON'T do as well in short yardage--although they sure came through in that Sneak on the goal line. Granted, Clifton and Tauscher are getting a little bit old, and maybe not quite getting there in certain situations. Last year, and his one big run this year, Grant didn't need that cut back.

I think this whole idea--knocking the performance of the O Line--is grasping at straws to knock a WINNING TEAM. It took a while for the Packers running game to kick in last season. With time--and a healthy Grant--it WILL do the job this season too--hopefully against the Cowboys. If it takes a little longer, well, it was unlikely we'd go unbeaten anyway, and they ARE the best opponent on the schedule.

So just enjoy the ride and don't try to dig up lame reasons to complain.

Well, we have a failure to communicate. I don't think pointing out weak areas in the Pack is knocking the team or anything else. What I (and "The Goat") are doing is observing and reporting. We've got a winning record in spite of an inability of our interior line to get runs blocked.

Sometimes I wonder if you watch the games. Every post from you seems to be "You rah, rah, sis boom bah, go Pack go!" & shit.

There isn't one complaint in my post. I ain't yelling, I'm telling.

We need to get some shove from our interior line (& the tackles, too) or we won't be a factor in big games and the play-offs. You must be able to win the alley fight to win the SB.

If you don't believe me, ask the Patriots if a smash mouth team can knock you off your pedastal. It's a goal that must be met & I'm posting the observation that we ain't there yet.

We might be in the future, but right now we are far short of being an effective run blocking line, especially in the interior, and especially in short yardage.

KY, you may not be yellin', but you're the one who claimed doom and gloom was reality--against all evidence.

Sure, the running game isn't quite hitting on all cylinders yet. That didn't stop the Packers from not only beating Minnesota, but doing so with a more effective running game than Indianapolis, a damn good team.

What we have are two aging mid round tackles built around a bargain basement interior three--OK, Colledge was a #1, but he's the exception, and he's criticized more than any of 'em. That O Line may not be up to a perfectionist's level, but it's outperforming most of the NFL O Lines in the running game, on top of being one of the very best in pass protection. And it's doing all that with our super RB playing at maybe 75% effectiveness--my estimate. What more do you guys want?

As for getting some "shove", you ought to realize by now, that's not exactly what ZBS is all about. And when it counted--on the goal line QB sneak, I'd say we had some "shove".

It would be one thing to whine if we were losing, but we aren't. U Rah Rah--we're winning--proving wrong the critics and naysayers--both the know-nothing outsider ones as well as the insider pretend-to-know something ones.

And I suppose if we lose to the Cowboys--likely the most talented team in the league--you guys are going to revel in that and feel all justified for having your negative and defeatist attitudes. Well, I think we will beat the Cowboys, but if we don't, who ever said we'd go unbeaten anyway? And no opponent on the schedule is tougher than this one.

Sorry, but negativity annoys me--ESPECIALLY when the negativists have the GALL to claim they are being realistic.

[KYPack]

Well Tex, here goes the infamous and hated "we've got to agree to disagree" post.

Because I basically disagree with you all up and down the line.

1stly, Daryn Colledge was a #2 pick, as was Chad Clifton.

Secondly, Eric (and my) contention that the interior of our OLine is underperforming against the run is NOT a statement of "Doom and Gloom". It's an observation based in fact. I don't think pointing out areas that need improvement is being a "negativist"

I know that is one of your pet words, but it's not negative to point out facts. Our Oline was LAST in the league in short yardage last year and we are having trouble getting push in short yardage plays this season. Our Oline needs to improve in these areas if we are going to be a top team and go to the big dance.

I am also confident that we will improve and get it done. We've got some good athletes at those interior spots that are maturing. When Wells and Sitton get back in form, we will have 5 good guys competing for the 3 interior spots. Competition builds performance and that's just what we'll do. Perform at a higher level. To say that we are performing at a high level in our interior run blocking is foolish and bullshit.

As far as the latter part of your post, if you think I'm one of the naysayers or you classify me as "an insider pretending-to-know something", then I'll say you are 100% full of shit.

I like people who subscribe to the "power of positve thinking".

But they aren't the kind of people I'd go scuba diving or mountain climbing with.

Sometimes you have to put down the pom-poms and pay attention to reality and the details.

The devil is in the details, ya know?

[boiga]

Here are some interesting and relevant articles from JSO and their weekly magazine: Notes: Tauscher aims to play better; Tackle struggled in first two games (http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=796590)
The first talks about how Tausch as been a little rusty with his fundamentals so far this season. He wasn't happy with his performance against the lions (he gave up 4.5 pressures and 2 bad runs) but should be back to form shortly.

Colledge strong-arming his way back; Guard rolling after rocky ‘07 (http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=795525)
This one discusses Colledge's improvement since last year. They say that his performance against the lions was "outstanding" in pass protection and Campen has very positive things about his performance against the Vikings.

If the Coaches are right and the problems thus far from the veteran tackles are merely rust, then hopefully these worries will simply amount to much ado about nothing.

[sheepshead]

Here are some interesting and relevant articles from JSO and their weekly magazine: Notes: Tauscher aims to play better; Tackle struggled in first two games (http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=796590)
The first talks about how Tausch as been a little rusty with his fundamentals so far this season. He wasn't happy with his performance against the lions (he gave up 4.5 pressures and 2 bad runs) but should be back to form shortly.

Colledge strong-arming his way back; Guard rolling after rocky ‘07 (http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=795525)
This one discusses Colledge's improvement since last year. They say that his performance against the lions was "outstanding" in pass protection and Campen has very positive things about his performance against the Vikings.

If the Coaches are right and the problems thus far from the veteran tackles are merely rust, then hopefully these worries will simply amount to much ado about nothing.

Not everyone's worried.

[texaspackerbacker]

Well Tex, here goes the infamous and hated "we've got to agree to disagree" post.

Because I basically disagree with you all up and down the line.

1stly, Daryn Colledge was a #2 pick, as was Chad Clifton.

Secondly, Eric (and my) contention that the interior of our OLine is underperforming against the run is NOT a statement of "Doom and Gloom". It's an observation based in fact. I don't think pointing out areas that need improvement is being a "negativist"

I know that is one of your pet words, but it's not negative to point out facts. Our Oline was LAST in the league in short yardage last year and we are having trouble getting push in short yardage plays this season. Our Oline needs to improve in these areas if we are going to be a top team and go to the big dance.

I am also confident that we will improve and get it done. We've got some good athletes at those interior spots that are maturing. When Wells and Sitton get back in form, we will have 5 good guys competing for the 3 interior spots. Competition builds performance and that's just what we'll do. Perform at a higher level. To say that we are performing at a high level in our interior run blocking is foolish and bullshit.

As far as the latter part of your post, if you think I'm one of the naysayers or you classify me as "an insider pretending-to-know something", then I'll say you are 100% full of shit.

I like people who subscribe to the "power of positve thinking".

But they aren't the kind of people I'd go scuba diving or mountain climbing with.

Sometimes you have to put down the pom-poms and pay attention to reality and the details.

The devil is in the details, ya know?

OK, KY. You're certainly entitled to your opinion, and I sure don't hate you for it. As for the "power of positive thinking", I don't much care one way or the other about that. The Packers are not a super team because I or anybody else among fans wills it to happen by positive thinking or any other psycho-babble crap like that. They are a super team because they are a super team. Even that super team, however, has better takent in some areas than others.

The crux of our disagreement is when you claim the O Line is "under-performing". I would say they are over-performing. We don't have the greatest talent there--decent, but not like some teams. And yet we have outstanding pass protection and way above average run blocking--you can disagree all you want, but the FACTS say different. Both yardage last year and comparative stats vs. the Vikings to what Indy did against the Vikings support the idea that the O Line is doing damn good.

And if you want to nit-pick about short yardage, well, maybe we weren't in short yardage situations as much--with all the passing TDs as well as Grant's long gainers, that would certainly seem likely. Also, as I said, the ZBS with generally smaller more mobile O Linemen isn't conducive to the big "shove" you are so hung up on.

Record-wise--which is the ultimate bottom line REALITY, we've done pretty damn good without that big "shove".

[Guiness]

Here are some interesting and relevant articles from JSO and their weekly magazine: Notes: Tauscher aims to play better; Tackle struggled in first two games (http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=796590)
The first talks about how Tausch as been a little rusty with his fundamentals so far this season. He wasn't happy with his performance against the lions (he gave up 4.5 pressures and 2 bad runs) but should be back to form shortly.

Colledge strong-arming his way back; Guard rolling after rocky ‘07 (http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=795525)
This one discusses Colledge's improvement since last year. They say that his performance against the lions was "outstanding" in pass protection and Campen has very positive things about his performance against the Vikings.

If the Coaches are right and the problems thus far from the veteran tackles are merely rust, then hopefully these worries will simply amount to much ado about nothing.

Good synopsis boiga. I wonder if our good buddies at JSO will complain that your paraphrasing is stealing content??? :roll:

[Guiness]

Yeah, you are right Fritz, I failed to mention that. I've always thought there might be another underlying problem. Personnel groups feed off & copy their leader. All our receivers play tough, run slants, and focus on YAC, etc., just like DD

Our Olineman excel at pass pro, but don't focus on their run blocks. The leaders of the line are Cliffy and Tausch.

One thing I've been hoping about is that one guy will rise up and become the interior road grader in short yardage that we lack. Maybe Sitton, Barbre, Spitz, I don't care, but some internal leader coming to the forefront could go a long way to helping our problem.

Do you think we have a guy on the team who can be a road grader?

I tend to think our personel almost precludes that. I know what you're saying about 'shove'. Aside from a couple of plays (and yes, the QB sneak for a TD was one of them) we don't drive the DL back two yards on running plays. The question is, are we trying to?

Grant's long run against Minn is interesting to look at. However, I think Moll blocking of K.Williams into the backer was as much the LB taking himself out of the play as anything, as opposed to a 'road grader' type move.

[Merlin]

I think the line has done a great job at keeping Rodgers protected. I also think Rodgers decision making has also kept him from getting killed out there. Rodgers has done a far better job than I and a lot of people thought he would after a shaky pre-season. I think that helps out everything a ton. As far as the run blocking, maybe it's just the whole "zone blocking" thing. I know last year we had at least a few plays that weren't zone blocking, I didn't see any the past two games, although I wasn't really looking either. I do agree that you can't continue to beat a dead horse with certain players. It's obvious that our guard situation has not improved under Thompson. I am not very optimistic that when Tauscher and Clifton's contracts are up that he will pay much to keep them (one of them is soon I believe and the other is the following year?). I haven't seen anyone on our roster that can step in at either tackle position and do the job consistently.

Something needs to be done to shake this line up, the OL is one place that the "build through the draft" attitude has not helped us at all. I also don't agree with over paying your OL like MN does.

[KYPack]

Yeah, you are right Fritz, I failed to mention that. I've always thought there might be another underlying problem. Personnel groups feed off & copy their leader. All our receivers play tough, run slants, and focus on YAC, etc., just like DD

Our Olineman excel at pass pro, but don't focus on their run blocks. The leaders of the line are Cliffy and Tausch.

One thing I've been hoping about is that one guy will rise up and become the interior road grader in short yardage that we lack. Maybe Sitton, Barbre, Spitz, I don't care, but some internal leader coming to the forefront could go a long way to helping our problem.


Do you think we have a guy on the team who can be a road grader?

I tend to think our personel almost precludes that. I know what you're saying about 'shove'. Aside from a couple of plays (and yes, the QB sneak for a TD was one of them) we don't drive the DL back two yards on running plays. The question is, are we trying to?

Grant's long run against Minn is interesting to look at. However, I think Moll blocking of K.Williams into the backer was as much the LB taking himself out of the play as anything, as opposed to a 'road grader' type move.

The two guys I think could be out interior "brutes" are Sitton and Barbre. That said, Colledge and Spitz may well be the end of the year starters at G. I really don't care who "wins", we've just got to get more productive in the interior.

As has been pointed out, we can be effective with the guys blocking at their present level of competence. We just won't be complete until we can "root hog 'em" for first downs. Finesse blocks and pass pro can get you some offense, but until you can blow the opponents up from time to time, your offense will be limited.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Rodgers has done a far better job than I and a lot of people thought he would after a shaky pre-season.

He had one shaky game. He was good in the Cincy game. He was poor in the San Fran game. He was great in the Denver game. He played one play in the Tennessee game and threw a long TD pass to Jennings. What shaky preseason did you see?

Bottom line: Rodgers had a 101 QB rating in the 2006 preseason. He had a 98 QB rating in the 2007 preseason. He had a 104 QB rating in the 2008 preseason. He had a 105 QB rating in his only relevant regular season action before this year (against Dallas). He had a 116 QB rating vs. Minnesota. He had a 117 QB rating vs. Detroit.

I see a pattern here that I really like.

[Harlan Huckleby]

As has been pointed out, we can be effective with the guys blocking at their present level of competence.

I don't know about this. This is like saying the team can be effective with Grant getting 4 yard per carry instead of 5. Depends on your goal. The team is competitive for the Super Bowl, and they will probably advance or be eliminated by a slim margin.

I want to see a shake-up on the O-line, there is much room for improvement. Just wishful thinking on my part, hope that they can be better than last year.

[boiga]

As has been pointed out, we can be effective with the guys blocking at their present level of competence.

I don't know about this. This is like saying the team can be effective with Grant getting 4 yard per carry instead of 5. Depends on your goal. The team is competitive for the Super Bowl, and they will probably advance or be eliminated by a slim margin.

I want to see a shake-up on the O-line, there is much room for improvement. Just wishful thinking on my part, hope that they can be better than last year.

But at this point in the game, would it really be worthwhile? Having Colledge, Wells, and Spitz in the middle will give us consistent pass protection and occasional big gains in the run. Our O-line isn't going to turn into Dallas' overnight and neither Barbre nor Sitton have shown the consistency required to be considered an upgrade.

If our Tackles can up their game and shake off the rust like we know they should, I don't see us having any difficulty with the run game. We won't be consistent in short yardage, but we should be productive.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Having Colledge, Wells, and Spitz in the middle will give us consistent pass protection and occasional big gains in the run.

Having Wells at center guarantees mediocre play from the position.

Having Colledge, Spitz and Sitton in the middle will give us consistent pass protection and occasional big gains in the run. :lol:



neither Barbre nor Sitton have shown the consistency required to be considered an upgrade.

Sez who? All we know for sure is that the coaches thought that Sitton was their best bet at RG before he hurt his knee.

I don't have any idea if Sitton is any good, all I know is that he looks like a big body. I'm engaged in wishful thinking, nothing more or less, but you don't have any more info than I do.

[pbmax]

tpb does have a valid point that is usually not the focus of articles on the O Line. The run blocking is far from a lost cause. Grant's injury is no doubt hurting production this year, as Jackson is still not his equal. And I don't think its fair to say Grant is the sole reason we can run at all. He's not the second coming of Dickerson or Sanders, otherwise, he would still be on the Giants with the dominant role in their RBBC approach. He is a very good fit for what we do.

But what is fair is what Eric, KYP and others have said. We struggle mightily in short yardage and goal line for the reasons described at length. And that does impact games. In the third quarter, when you have a lead and want to clock to run, the running game has been stymied by both the Vikings and the Lions. What is left is a choice, and this is where discussion of McCarthy's choice is fair. He has selected a run scheme that lends itself not to grinding out the clock, unless execution up front is exceptional. Even Denver's O Line could be had in short yardage during the days of Terrell Davis. He knows this coming in, but he still must devise a way to control the clock in the second half.

This leaves him with two competing needs; one, to get a lineup's performance on a level like Denver's where short yardage isn't the strongest suit, but is at least average. Currently, this requires training, game experience and possible lineup changes. However, the second need is to execute an offense that can keep the D off the field in the second half. If you have a lead, the opponents are throwing more and if you O isn't on the field you are going to gas your pass rushers. Especially this D that can itself struggle to get off the field on 3rd downs.

In both the Lions and Vikings games, McCarthy committed to the run in the 3rd and 4th QTRs and had a bunch of three and outs. That put his defense in a bad place. Sometimes running the football is good, even if you don't make tremendous yards because of how it can shorten the game if there are no O penalties. But the time to do that may be later in the 4th Quarter, not the 3rd.

In the 3rd, M3 might need to forget the training and do what worked in the first half (assuming you have the lead) and save the short yardage, grind it out training for late in the game.

[Patler]

A true zone running game is not a ball control running scheme. It is not expected to generate time-consuming fourth quarter drives. If you come in and run-run-run, you might see several "three and outs". What is hoped for is that in the course of one of those late game series, you will catch an anxious, but tired linebacker or safety out of position, a lane will open and the runner takes it the distance. As McCarthy once said, it isn't expected to eat the clock, it is expected to break the back of the other team with a demoralizing long run.

In some ways, you can say that it has worked as expected, with Grant's 56 yard run to the 1 and Jackson's 19 yard TD coming in the 4th quarters of the two games, with the Packers protecting small leads. Both were crucial scores putting the Packers up by two scores.

[boiga]

If that's the case, Patler, we really should be throwing it more in the 4th quarter. Our most effective way of running out the clock is the short pass. 5 yarders to Lee and Jones have been much more effective for us than trying to gain consistent short yardage from the running game.

Also, one of our big problems against the lions was that Grant had his reps diminished so much that every time he was on the field we ran the ball. If we can only run the ball successfully by surprising the D-line, fine. But we're going to need to be more creative about our play calling from the rushing personnel packages to keep defenses honest. M3 discussed that during his press conference today.

[texaspackerbacker]

A true zone running game is not a ball control running scheme. It is not expected to generate time-consuming fourth quarter drives. If you come in and run-run-run, you might see several "three and outs". What is hoped for is that in the course of one of those late game series, you will catch an anxious, but tired linebacker or safety out of position, a lane will open and the runner takes it the distance. As McCarthy once said, it isn't expected to eat the clock, it is expected to break the back of the other team with a demoralizing long run.

In some ways, you can say that it has worked as expected, with Grant's 56 yard run to the 1 and Jackson's 19 yard TD coming in the 4th quarters of the two games, with the Packers protecting small leads. Both were crucial scores putting the Packers up by two scores.

Excellent Points, Patler. This is exactly what I've been saying.

Some of these posters--and the guy who wrote the article--would take their Corvette, put a trailer hitch on it, and whine because they couldn't pull a big enough load of rocks.

The aspect that goes the farthest toward making a good offensive line is playing together for a while. What they do is a team effort more than any other position group. Check out the O Line that won it all for the Packers in '95. Go way back and check out Gregg, Skoronski, Kramer, Thurston, and Bowman (show me the over-size "root 'em out" type behemoth there) .

And you know what? Other than a very notable goal line QB Sneak and maybe a few other instances, their forte was NOT a big "shove" either.

[KYPack]

A true zone running game is not a ball control running scheme. It is not expected to generate time-consuming fourth quarter drives. If you come in and run-run-run, you might see several "three and outs". What is hoped for is that in the course of one of those late game series, you will catch an anxious, but tired linebacker or safety out of position, a lane will open and the runner takes it the distance. As McCarthy once said, it isn't expected to eat the clock, it is expected to break the back of the other team with a demoralizing long run.

In some ways, you can say that it has worked as expected, with Grant's 56 yard run to the 1 and Jackson's 19 yard TD coming in the 4th quarters of the two games, with the Packers protecting small leads. Both were crucial scores putting the Packers up by two scores.

Excellent Points, Patler. This is exactly what I've been saying.

Some of these posters--and the guy who wrote the article--would take their Corvette, put a trailer hitch on it, and whine because they couldn't pull a big enough load of rocks.

The aspect that goes the farthest toward making a good offensive line is playing together for a while. What they do is a team effort more than any other position group. Check out the O Line that won it all for the Packers in '95. Go way back and check out Gregg, Skoronski, Kramer, Thurston, and Bowman (show me the over-size "root 'em out" type behemoth there) .

And you know what? Other than a very notable goal line QB Sneak and maybe a few other instances, their forte was NOT a big "shove" either.

Well, I'm some deep yogurt here.

I'm on the other side of Patler & Tex.

That's cool, I've been there before.

ZBS running games can be successful in short yardage and grind it out on the ground. If you don't believe me, go back to Super Bowl 32, when the Broncos ran our asses in the ground and off the field. Our present ZBS is not productive in short yardage, intermittent in general, and non-existent in the counters. Until we get more productive consistently on the ground, we will not have a Super Bowl winning combination on offense.

Tex, firstly, if that crack about hauling rocks with a corvette is directed at me, you can shove every syllable up your rectal sphincter.

Secondly, both our '95 Oline AND the Lombardi Packers offensive line were VERY productive in short yardage situations and in the running game in general.

On the '95 team Aaron Taylor, Frankie Winters and Adam Timmerman could root with the best of 'em. None of our current interior lineman can execute run blocks as well as this group could.

On the Lombardi Packers, who said anything about oversized as a criteria anyhow? That team was the essence of Oline teamwork and getting the job done. We are talking about the ability to move people off the line, hold'em and finish. Who could do that? Oh, two guys named Gregg and Kramer for one example. In the '67 play-off against the Rams in Milwaukee, my Uncle and I screamed ourselves hoarse as Jerry and Forrest totally manhandled a HOF defensive tackle and DE. Deacon Jones and Merlin Olsen were repeatedly blown off the line by Kramer and Gregg, in all running situations. When you speak of the Lombardi Packers you are talking about one of the greatest run blocking lines in NFL history. Were any of 'em behemoths? No, and no one has said you have to be. You must have the ability to execute your blocking assignments. Which of those lineman could deliver the "big shove"? All five 'em or Vince would go find a player who could get the job done.

That kind of line play is the bedrock of a sucessful offense. The NFL is now a passing league and you must have the kind of pass attack that we now possess to make it all the way. But a running game is the foundation of a successful offense. Our guys can pass pro with anybody. Run blocking , especially in short yardage is still lacking.

I've got a lot of faith in MM & his staff. I think he'll get 'em coached up, moved around and find the right combination to get the run blocked up in all situations. But he's not there yet.

Tex, you ain't worried, I guess. You think everything is fine and our Oline is just hunky dory. But somebody disagrees with you. His name is Mike McCarthy & he doesn't think the line is fine. He thinks it needs to improve if he's gonna have the kind of offense he wants to put on the field. Oh, he says nice stuff about our Oline and the guys in the papers. But look what he's done. He has been constantly shuffling guys around, trying to hit on a combination that will gel and click.

He wants to find a group that is confident and can execute. He ain't found it yet. I think he will, but I'm not gonna play head cheerleader and say this bunch is great and we don't need to worry. Because we need to develop a whole bunch if we are gonna get it done.

[texaspackerbacker]

Well, KY, your sense of history is right up there with mine. You know what that makes you--OLD.

As for invoking McCarthy, no good coach is ever satisfied or not looking for improvement, but worried? I haven't seen any evidence of that. Neither you or I are head coach OR head cheer leader. We're just fans, and as fans, the bottom line is winning games--not style points. I don't know if you're a Badger fan, but that Fresno game is a good example--just winning a tough game under difficult circumstances is good enough. I'll take that for the Packers anytime (well, actually, that's not exactly true because I've got so many Packers on so many fantasy teams).

Nobody ever said there isn't room for improvement in the Packers O Line, just that calling it under-performing, etc. isn't accurate when it's winning games and out-performing a helluva lot of other teams. That ought to be plenty good enough--from a fan perspective anyway.

And if I need to explain my metaphor, the Corvette is the line that is near flawless against the pass rush and damn good in springing receivers for long gains--in large part, BECAUSE they are smaller and more mobile. Hauling the load of rocks is expecting those smaller more mobile linemen to get the same kind of "shove" as a bunch of 350 pounders--and not just in a few crucial situations, but consistently. I don't know, KY. Do you have a trailer hitch on your Corvette?

[KYPack]

Actually, when I wanna haul rocks around, I use an old truck we have at the farm.

I think we're thru here. I think the line needs to get better in some situations. You think everthing is all good.

I hope the line gets everything corrected and we get on track in all the play situations. Then the "argument" is moot.

Regardless, I think the future is rosy. If these kids don't get it together this season, there is enough talent and energy around that one years experience will give us a helluva OLine.

[The Gunshooter]

One problem that is solved. Rodgers can pick-up a yard with the sneak. As long as the line gets low he can out quick the defense.