Packer running game: stinks

[Harlan Huckleby]

The Packers have really lousy run blocking all around. The creases in the NFL are small, but I'm not sure I'm seeing much of any daylight. Second-level blocking on linebackers? Forget it. Our linemen never seem to pull, I wonder if they can, they are slow.

Grant & Starks are decent running backs. Maybe Bulaga was not 100% today or something. But when I watch other NFL teams, the defensive linemen are not getting so much penetration.

The running stats probably aren't horrible, but that's largely because the draws sometimes work. When they need to run, they are so-so or worse.

I guess with Rodgers being so damn good, it is hard to get the chemistry working for a running game. IT is far more important that the pass blocking be solid, and solid it has been.

[MJZiggy]

Half the line is out with injury and you're worried about them creating daylight? I'm just happy they're keeping Rodgers upright.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I suppose you are right, or half-right since the line was largely there today, but I guess for entertainment purposes I do like to watch a good running game. Maybe I'm spoiled by watching the Badgers, whose linemen are like dancing bears. Other NFL teams seem to block the opponents linebackers now and then, for Christ's sake. The Packers just don't have a bit of rhythm in their running game. Everything about their blocking stinks, including downfield blocking. They get a few decent runs because of the defense playing the pass.

[channtheman]

I'm getting frustrated with this team continually pulling out the RB that is hot. Today, it was Grant. He had 20 some yards on 4 carries I think on the first drive. Then we pulled him and I think on the very next drive we decided it was time for a Starks carry (stuffed) and a Kuhn carry (stuffed). We NEVER seem to keep it going with the one guy who is doing well.

[KalamazooPackerFan]

I'm getting frustrated with this team continually pulling out the RB that is hot. Today, it was Grant. He had 20 some yards on 4 carries I think on the first drive. Then we pulled him and I think on the very next drive we decided it was time for a Starks carry (stuffed) and a Kuhn carry (stuffed). We NEVER seem to keep it going with the one guy who is doing well.

Exactly my thoughts. The whole game was kind of blah today but the lack of running game really contributed to a 2nd half of uninspired and uninspiring football. Grant seems like a starter in name only and I'm not sure why since he sure seems to consistently pick up the 4-5 yards that our running game is expected to get. Starks, who I loved last year, really seems to have lost his mojo for hitting a seam and making something happen. (I wonder if it could be that by the time he came on last year all our opponents were so used to playing us to pass first that any run at all took them by surprise.)

[Tony Oday]

Damn 6-0!!!

[Upnorth]

The runn game is substantially better than last year, which does not mean it is great, but passable.

[King Friday]

We don't really have a starting caliber NFL back IMO. Grant clearly isn't what he used to be. He probably was one of the top 10 backs in the NFL at one point, but like most RBs it seems that Grant only had a couple years of productive service at his prime. Starks just doesn't have the speed to work outside the tackles, and our offensive line isn't going to open up holes for him consistently enough for him to have success.

If our passing game was more average, our running game would be even MORE pathetic. The fact we can't do anything on the ground when the defense has to cover the entire field against the pass is ridiculous.

[RashanGary]

bullshit.

[KalamazooPackerFan]

We don't really have a starting caliber NFL back IMO. Grant clearly isn't what he used to be. He probably was one of the top 10 backs in the NFL at one point, but like most RBs it seems that Grant only had a couple years of productive service at his prime. Starks just doesn't have the speed to work outside the tackles, and our offensive line isn't going to open up holes for him consistently enough for him to have success.

If our passing game was more average, our running game would be even MORE pathetic. The fact we can't do anything on the ground when the defense has to cover the entire field against the pass is ridiculous.

I don't really see that about Grant. He's always been a guy who got better as the game went on but he hasn't had any chance to do so this year as they try to split his carries with Starks and, to a lesser degree, Kuhn. He seems to me to be hitting the holes (when they are there) with the same authority as the year he broke out and he's opened up the last couple of games with some good runs and then disappeared from lack of chances more than anything else.

[Brandon494]

What I had a problem with was the toss to Kuhn out of the shotgun on 3rd and short, hope I never see that play again until we get a speedy back.

[Brandon494]

I'm ok with the run game though with the way the O-line has been banged up. Its nothing flashy with these guys but both are averaging around 4.5 yards per carry while last season we did not have a running back on the team who averaged more than 4 yards per carry.

[RashanGary]

I'd bet on the run game getting better. They're playing with leads all the time. That makes it tougher to run too. Stats might be misleading there.

Newhouse just started his first game at LT. He already looks better than Clifton this year. I think it would be more likely than not he gets better.

Lang is in his first year starting. I think it would be more likely than not he continues to grow into his job

Wells and Sitton are Wells and Sitton.

Bulaga is 1 game back from his injury. I doubt we saw his best ball today.

It's a young group.

[digitaldean]

If they can get any semblance of a running game, it will neutralize MINN and DET's pass rush. It will need to improve before the playoffs start. Grant, minus the Chicago game, has lacked the spark he used to have. Starks is OK, but not consistent enough.

[HarveyWallbangers]

The running game is ahead of where it usually is under McCarthy at this time of year. It's miles ahead of where it was at last year at this time. I agree with Harrell. It's frustrating to watch Kuhn get stopped on consecutive 3rd and 2s, but I can't complain about the running game this year. The one thing we'll likely never be able to do is run the ball consistently when the other team knows we are likely going to run it. With the leads we've had, we've been in that situation a lot this year--and it's hurt the old yards/carry.

[Bretsky]

if AROD plays at this level we don't need to run

[swede]

Our running game is not scary. Our passing game is scary.

I cannot find any fault in our running game. It is effective enough to keep the defense honest. Mac is calling 90% of the running plays spot on, with the 10% exception of Kuhn suckage.

[CaliforniaCheez]

The run game is substantially better than last year, which does not mean it is great, but passable.

There is no molehill so small that we cannot turn it into a mountain.


Aaron Rodgers leads Tom Brady by only 18.3 in QB rating and only Leads Drew Brees in completion % by 1.6%.
Rodgers only leads Brady by one TD pass.

Greg Jennings is only 5th in the NFL in receiving yards and Nelson is only 15th. Of receivers that have 20 catches, Nelson is only second in yards per catch and that is only 1.4 yards per catch ahead of Randall Cobb, a rookie.

Morgan Burnett and Charles Woodson are only tied for 2nd in the league in INT's and got none against the Rams.

As a team the Packers are only 4th in total offense. Their lead in scoring points is only 9. They are only 5th in time of possesion. They are only 4th in 3rd down conversion %. They are only 7th lowest in penalty yards.

As a team they are only 4th in turnover ratio. Their defense is only 9th in points given up (unless the Dolphins give up more than 10 this Monday Night, then 8th).


The Packers have a lot of things to work on and improve.

[Bossman641]

Starks is pissing me off. There were a couple times where it looked like he had a hole if he had just stuck his foot in the ground and turned upfield. Not huge holes, but it would have been good for at least 4-5 yards. Instead, he is constantly stringing things out wide. I don't know if he is looking for the big play or what because when he does actually get his momentum going and hits the holes he looks pretty good.

[woodbuck27]

Exactly my thoughts. The whole game was kind of blah today but the lack of running game really contributed to a 2nd half of uninspired and uninspiring football. Grant seems like a starter in name only and I'm not sure why since he sure seems to consistently pick up the 4-5 yards that our running game is expected to get. Starks, who I loved last year, really seems to have lost his mojo for hitting a seam and making something happen. (I wonder if it could be that by the time he came on last year all our opponents were so used to playing us to pass first that any run at all took them by surprise.)

I re-call Starks making at least one if not two decent plays running the ball. That aside we do need more in the run.

The thing is with Aaron Rodgers looking like a NFL QB with the best arm ever and somehow eluding the defensive rush and ziping the ball as if it was a dart OUR HC won't stick to the run. OUR Superstar QB is front and center on display and eventually that's going to call the price. We have to run the ball not showboat Aaron Rodgers until he,s gone for several games, the season or for a career ending attempted passing play.

OUR HC has to do all he can to protect Aaron Rodgers. How? Run the ball.

[bobblehead]

The Packers have really lousy run blocking all around. The creases in the NFL are small, but I'm not sure I'm seeing much of any daylight. Second-level blocking on linebackers? Forget it. Our linemen never seem to pull, I wonder if they can, they are slow.

Grant & Starks are decent running backs. Maybe Bulaga was not 100% today or something. But when I watch other NFL teams, the defensive linemen are not getting so much penetration.

The running stats probably aren't horrible, but that's largely because the draws sometimes work. When they need to run, they are so-so or worse.

I guess with Rodgers being so damn good, it is hard to get the chemistry working for a running game. IT is far more important that the pass blocking be solid, and solid it has been.

We have run very effectively for most of the games. Teams are realizing that they have to honor the run so Rodgers doesn't eat them alive on 2nd and 5. Despite billing, you must run effectively in this league. We didn't (especially in the second half) yesterday and our offense slowed down a bit. Its not a trend at this point though.

[bobblehead]

What I had a problem with was the toss to Kuhn out of the shotgun on 3rd and short, hope I never see that play again until we get a speedy back.

Normally I would accuse you of stereotyping a white back as slow....but in this case you are right. That play is better run by alex green.

[3irty1]

The running game is serving its purpose so far. Generally come December it really takes off with MM. I wouldn't read too much into any of the offense right now. When MM is playing the Rams, obviously he's going to try to win but he's also self-scouting and making tape. The Rams are bad enough that you can beat them while setting up some things to work later from the tape you leave future teams to study.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

Its hard to really say if the packers running game is good or bad. Both Grant and Starks are averaging 4.5 ypc and have been effective, but the offense hasn't really needed to rely on them yet. In all six games the passing offense has been very good to great. In all six games we run the ball mostly just to keep the defense off balance and not b/c the passing game is not getting it done.

I would love to see Green get some touches, esp. on third downs. Its not like Grant or Starks are great blockers so I don't see why we don't give the guy his chance. Maybe they want to save him towards the end of the year.

[pbmax]

Starks is pissing me off. There were a couple times where it looked like he had a hole if he had just stuck his foot in the ground and turned upfield. Not huge holes, but it would have been good for at least 4-5 yards. Instead, he is constantly stringing things out wide. I don't know if he is looking for the big play or what because when he does actually get his momentum going and hits the holes he looks pretty good.

I agree with this. He seems to have regressed somehow, in season. Weird.

[pbmax]

I am a little surprised that Sitton is getting pushed around the last two games. He has played better before and needs to get back to that level.

[Harlan Huckleby]

We don't really have a starting caliber NFL back IMO .
Nah, the backs are not great but they have their moments. They might be average, give or take.



If our passing game was more average, our running game would be even MORE pathetic. The fact we can't do anything on the ground when the defense has to cover the entire field against the pass is ridiculous.
Yes, well said. But I think problem is due to no coordination/movement in the blocking. They might be better if they did it more.

[Harlan Huckleby]

What I had a problem with was the toss to Kuhn out of the shotgun on 3rd and short, hope I never see that play again until we get a speedy back. Even a speedy back is not going to beat so many defenders in the backfield.

[Harlan Huckleby]

We have run very effectively for most of the games. Teams are realizing that they have to honor the run so Rodgers doesn't eat them alive on 2nd and 5. Despite billing, you must run effectively in this league. We didn't (especially in the second half) yesterday and our offense slowed down a bit. Its not a trend at this point though.
I would say they had 2 or 3 effective running games.

I don't care about stats. I can see with my eyeball peepers that they are out of sync with the blocking. I get that NFL defenders are so fast that a well-blocked play doesn't mean gaping holes. But I see other teams doing a better job. The defensive line is getting penetration, preventing our Olinemen from ever getting to second level. I don't see blocking from WRs, although that is often off-screen.

For a team that the announcers call "the only dominant team in the NFL" it is odd to see such ineptness. Guess this is what the NFL has come to.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

I agree with this. He seems to have regressed somehow, in season. Weird.

I do agree with this. I was on the Starks ban wangon, but I do see him missing a lot of holes.

[rbaloha1]

IMO the running game is good enough to allow for teams to respect play action.

Grant requires space to run. Starks leaves plenty of yards on the field by continually misreading blocks.

IMO MM is saving Green. Recall the fresh legs Starks brought to the offense.

[bobblehead]

I would say they had 2 or 3 effective running games.

I don't care about stats. I can see with my eyeball peepers that they are out of sync with the blocking. I get that NFL defenders are so fast that a well-blocked play doesn't mean gaping holes. But I see other teams doing a better job. The defensive line is getting penetration, preventing our Olinemen from ever getting to second level. I don't see blocking from WRs, although that is often off-screen.

For a team that the announcers call "the only dominant team in the NFL" it is odd to see such ineptness. Guess this is what the NFL has come to.

I think its more like 4 solid running performances. 2 below average, but we stayed committed to running and that is enough when you have the greatest QB in the game.

[mraynrand]

I agree with this. He seems to have regressed somehow, in season. Weird.

I think this is due to the loss of Edgar Bennett as rb coach. Jerry Fontenot may be the manchurian RB coach.

[red]

i see nothing wrong with our running game, its nothing special, but we don't need an AP type of back and running game.

our running game is what it is. it's there to keep teams somewhat honest so our passing game opens up a little more

our backs are pretty good IMO, they just don't need to be anymore then they currently are

[Pugger]

i see nothing wrong with our running game, its nothing special, but we don't need an AP type of back and running game.

our running game is what it is. it's there to keep teams somewhat honest so our passing game opens up a little more

our backs are pretty good IMO, they just don't need to be anymore then they currently are

This.

[denverYooper]

I would say they had 2 or 3 effective running games.

I don't care about stats. I can see with my eyeball peepers that they are out of sync with the blocking. I get that NFL defenders are so fast that a well-blocked play doesn't mean gaping holes. But I see other teams doing a better job. The defensive line is getting penetration, preventing our Olinemen from ever getting to second level. I don't see blocking from WRs, although that is often off-screen.

For a team that the announcers call "the only dominant team in the NFL" it is odd to see such ineptness. Guess this is what the NFL has come to.

WRT blocking, their line has been in flux for the last 3 games b/c of the injuries at T. Continuity should help out some with the synchronization. Getting Bulaga back into a comfortable rhythm will help.

[denverYooper]

The other thing that might be messing with running game a bit at the moment is the two back (maybe 3 by year's end) approach. They do have fresh legs, but maybe aren't able to establish the kind of rhythm they could if run 20 carries per game. Maybe it'll pay off down the stretch though in having fresher RBs when the weather gets cold. MM always seems to get the best out his guys in the 2nd half of the season and I'm pretty sure it's by design.

I'm with Red, the running game's not really a problem.

[RashanGary]

Playing with leads hurts the running game. When you're behind 2 scores, teams rush the passer first. When you're up 2 scores, teams stop the run first.

Very misleading numbers and misleading perception of what is happening. The way a lineman ultimately blocks has a lot to do with the way the guy across from him is playing. If a DE rushes straight up field, Bulaga pushes him to the side and it's an easy, clean block. Some Packerrats could probably make that block of just getting out of the way. If a DE decides he's going to stay square and run block first, it's not nearly as easy to shove the same DL aside.

Also, we have one of the youngest OL in the league. They'll grow together.

I'll bet dollars to doughnuts this is a non-issue. I'll bet we play bad weather games better than we have in several years precisely because this OL is the best run blocking unit we've had in years, despite HH's unwillingness to consider context on his contrarian mission.

But what would a forum be with all ass patting and prostate pressure in HH's case?

Now, if Neal doesn't come back and make an impact, we might have some major trouble against well oiled passing attacks in the playoffs. That is a real issue.

[Iron Mike]

We stinks.... (http://www.csnchicago.com/sportsnetChicago/search/v/40806412/carlos-zambrano-calls-the-cubs-a-triple-a-team-says-we-stink-6-5.htm)

[Harlan Huckleby]

Cliff Crystl's take:
http://packersnews.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20111017/PKR07/111017146/Baranczyk-Christl-column-Cakewalk-against-Rams-allows-some-Packers-nitpicking

Running backs have to make somebody miss, and the special ones do that. James Starks does it once in awhile; Ryan Grant even less. Let’s face it, the Packers haven’t had anything but serviceable backs since 2003, the last year of Ahman Green’s prime. Green had the speed to go the distance on any given play. Pure and simple, Starks and Grant aren’t dynamic runners.

They both run hard, especially Starks when he gets his shoulders parallel to the line of scrimmage and his pads down. Starks also looks quicker on his cuts and shifts into second gear faster.

But what they contribute is what they are. Against a Rams’ defense that was playing with seven men in the box, Starks had a 3.8 yard average per carry and Grant a 2.8 average.

All that said, the Packers won a Super Bowl with Starks, and they can win one again. What will be interesting to watch is whether they continue to split time between the two. Maybe it will keep them both fresh and healthy, and it has become common around the league for teams to rotate backs.

But do the Packers give their backs enough carries for it to work? Neither one ever seems to get his game legs. When a back carries the ball two, three times then sits, it can be difficult for him to get a feel for what’s going on, or a line on the speed of the defense, or how to set up a linebacker or safety.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Crystl makes an interesting point: it's fine for a running team to split carries among backs. But for a passing team like the Pack, it doesn't allow enough carries for either player to get into a flow.

[Joemailman]

Crystl makes an interesting point: it's fine for a running team to split carries among backs. But for a passing team like the Pack, it doesn't allow enough carries for either player to get into a flow.

Debatable point. Packers rank 17th in rushing attempts per game at about 26. Leaders in rushing attempts average about 31. Not sure those extra 5 rush attempts per game make that big a difference. Maybe the Packers O-Linemen are just average run blockers.

[woodbuck27]

The other thing that might be messing with running game a bit at the moment is the two back (maybe 3 by year's end) approach. They do have fresh legs, but maybe aren't able to establish the kind of rhythm they could if run 20 carries per game. Maybe it'll pay off down the stretch though in having fresher RBs when the weather gets cold. MM always seems to get the best out his guys in the 2nd half of the season and I'm pretty sure it's by design.

I'm with Red, the running game's not really a problem.

We're 6-0. So what if we're not producing 120 yards per game on the ground. It all depends o the OL right? As that OL jells so goes the running game. Let,s pray for jelling in the playoff's.

[Pugger]

But it would be nice if we had a running game capable of converting 3rd and short. :neutral: It is ridiculous for us to have to go into the shotgun in these situations. I'm hoping our anemic running game against the Rams was because we were playing down to our competition because this ain't gonna cut it when we play a stouter defense down the road.

[vince]

This is like a broken record from last year.

[denverYooper]

This is like a broken record from last year.

But Vince, how are they gonna win in January with a subpar running game?

[Harlan Huckleby]

This is like a broken record from last year. Last year we had Jackson & Kuhn as running backs. This year we have a little better talent at RB, ought to be clicking better.

Look, vince, maybe you aren't a serious football fan. You sit in your little sissy den with your sissy stamp collection on the wall, drinking iced tab through straw, and you clap when Rodgers completes a pass. "Aaron! Aaron! Aaron!"

Some of us appreciate an occasional taste of old school football. We want to see the Packers pound the rock. Push back the bad guys, not just pass over them. An occasional punishing run, or faked-out DB would be swell.

I know the PAckers are undefeated. I know it is a passing league. I am not whining, I'm complaining. There's an important difference.

[Fritz]

I agree with the Blue Dog. It's not enough for this team to be undefeated; I want them to be undefeated in the manner with which I am most comfortable.

[pbmax]

I agree with the Blue Dog. It's not enough for this team to be undefeated; I want them to be undefeated in the manner with which I am most comfortable.

Even with a girlfriend, you are still bringing your A-game. :lol:

[HarveyWallbangers]

Kind of funny since I thought are running game has been considerably improved over last year--especially at this time. Last year, our top two RBs averaged 3.7, and 3.5 yards/carry. This year, it's 4.3 and 4.2 yards/carry. (BTW, Adrian Peterson is averaging 4.4 yards/carry.) The only thing that made our stats look average last year and what's keeping our stats being solid this year is that Aaron Rodgers is scrambling a lot less. Instead of him averaging 5.6 yards/carry, he's averaging 2.5 yards/carry. Usually, our running game improves as the season wears on. If that happens this year, we could be looking at two RBs averaging around 4.5 yards/carry.

[Pugger]

I'm beginning to suspect our issues with run blocking and pass rushing is directly related to the lockout and not practicing in pads more than once a week.

[Gunakor]

Last year we had Jackson & Kuhn as running backs. This year we have a little better talent at RB, ought to be clicking better.

Look, vince, maybe you aren't a serious football fan. You sit in your little sissy den with your sissy stamp collection on the wall, drinking iced tab through straw, and you clap when Rodgers completes a pass. "Aaron! Aaron! Aaron!"

Some of us appreciate an occasional taste of old school football. We want to see the Packers pound the rock. Push back the bad guys, not just pass over them. An occasional punishing run, or faked-out DB would be swell.

I know the PAckers are undefeated. I know it is a passing league. I am not whining, I'm complaining. There's an important difference.

So, your complaint is that we should take the ball out of Aaron Rodgers' hands more often? I don't think that's a wise idea. In fact, I'd tar and feather the first offensive coordinator that tried it. I guarantee there wouldn't be a second. Passing over the defense early and often seems to be the far better option.

[Harlan Huckleby]

So, your complaint is that we should take the ball out of Aaron Rodgers' hands more often? no, I'd just like to see better effort when they do run. seems like they are going through motions.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I agree with the Blue Dog. It's not enough for this team to be undefeated; I want them to be undefeated in the manner with which I am most comfortable.
I want to see an improved running game whether they win lose or draw.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Last year, our top two RBs averaged 3.7, and 3.5 yards/carry. This year, it's 4.3 and 4.2 yards/carry. (BTW, Adrian Peterson is averaging 4.4 yards/carry.) I won't bother to check your stats, since you are as honest as the day is long. Well, at least around winter solstice.
The fact that Adrian Peterson has ypc similar to Ryan Grant tells you all you need to know about the definitiveness of that stat.

I know that Starks and Grant have broken some 15 yarders and the stats are respectable. I'm offering my own expert, subjective evaluation of the run blocking. It looks pretty spastic. What is your expert, subjective view of the blocking so far this season?

[vince]

Here's some fodder to soothe your sad searching soul Harlan.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oB3mp7-EYW0

[sharpe1027]

I'm beginning to suspect our issues with run blocking and pass rushing is directly related to the lockout and not practicing in pads more than once a week.

No, it is just bad pad level. ;)

[vince]

“And so these are the legs that have opened up the future. The legs that won their way through a humble season. The legs that have excited the long awaited return to glory of the Green Bay Packers.”
Um, maybe not.

[Guiness]

Here's some fodder to soothe your sad searching soul Harlan.

There's a guy who didn't go down from first contact.

There's a Scott Hunter sighting in there. Ugh.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Here's some fodder to soothe your sad searching soul Harlan. I absolutely worshiped John Brockington as a kid. John Brockington, MacArthur Lane.
One Xmas I ordered a JB poster for my brother. It never came in mail, the gag "gift" I gave him instead did not go over, and incident remains a subject of contention. I tried to buy a John Brockington poster on ebay to heal 40-year-old wound, but they cost a jillion dollars now.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I won't bother to check your stats, since you are as honest as the day is long. Well, at least around winter solstice.
The fact that Adrian Peterson has ypc similar to Ryan Grant tells you all you need to know about the definitiveness of that stat.

I know that Starks and Grant have broken some 15 yarders and the stats are respectable. I'm offering my own expert, subjective evaluation of the run blocking. It looks pretty spastic. What is your expert, subjective view of the blocking so far this season?

Hey, it would be great if we could improve in run offense and pass defense, but it's hard for a team to be good in everything. Sometimes teams have to specialize in certain areas to maximize their talent. Or give up one thing to be great at another. Maybe the run blocking talent just isn't that good. Wells isn't a road grader, Sitton should be good at everything (although he's having a slightly down year), Clifton was never a good run blocker, Lang and Newhouse are new starters, and Bulaga has been hurt. If given the choice, I'd rather have an average run blocking OL and great pass blocking OL--rather than the reverse.

[vince]

The running game can obviously improve, but it is secondary to the passing game and I think it will as the season progresses. As Harv alluded to, continuity over time will help. Get Bulaga and Newhouse settled in and working with the others more consistently and they'll get better.

[Harlan Huckleby]

The first time I see a safety get blocked, I will cancel the jihad.

[Fritz]

Funny you mentioned that line about the "long awaited return to glory." I was going to remark upon the same thing. "Long awaited"? It'd only been about five years since the Pack had won it all. Little did we know that it was going to be another twenty-five.

Brockington was not fast at all - he was the classic 70's back - like Earl Campbell and Steve Owens, a big, lumbering guy with a couple of moves. But you look at that youtube video and you see more than one defensive back who didn't look to anxious to get in the way of JB.

[vince]

http://www.onionsportsnetwork.com/articles/sports-fan-digs-deep-finds-something-to-complain-a,26217/

Sports Fan Digs Deep, Finds Something To Complain About

http://o.onionstatic.com/images/articles/article/26/26217/NIB-Fan-R_jpg_635x345_crop-smart_upscale_q85.jpg

HARLAN'S MOM'S BASEMENT, WI—Though the Green Bay Packers solidly defeated the St. Louis Rams by 21 points Sunday, Packers fan Harlan Huckleby reached into the depths of his being after the victory to bitch about the team's inconsistency running the ball. "It's nice that we were able to easily pass the ball against the Rams' defense and keep their offense out of the end zone the entire game, but the Packers have such lousy run blocking all around and I want to see them run it down their throats damnit. It stinks," said Huckleby, who also noted that the Packers gave up more than 300 yards through the air on the way to their 24-3 victory. "And why is McCarthy giving the ball to Grant when Starks is clearly the better runner. We should be beating every team by at least 30 points. Jesus Christ." Huckleby reportedly spent the offseason complaining about the Packers' dropped passes and poor choice of run plays during their Super Bowl victory.

[Freak Out]

LOL!

[Guiness]

I absolutely worshiped John Brockington as a kid. John Brockington, MacArthur Lane.
One Xmas I ordered a JB poster for my brother. It never came in mail, the gag "gift" I gave him instead did not go over, and incident remains a subject of contention. I tried to buy a John Brockington poster on ebay to heal 40-year-old wound, but they cost a jillion dollars now.


Actually, their $6, plus $3 shipping you hoser.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/JOHN-BROCKINGTON-1974-GREEN-BAY-PACKERS-FOOTBALL-PHOTO-/330471637108?pt=US_Football_Fan_Shop&hash=item4cf1a50074

[Harlan Huckleby]

Actually, their $6, plus $3 shipping you hoser.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/JOHN-BROCKINGTON-1974-GREEN-BAY-PACKERS-FOOTBALL-PHOTO-/330471637108?pt=US_Football_Fan_Shop&hash=item4cf1a50074

that is a photo, not a wall poster.

http://l.yimg.com/a/p/sp/editorial_image/53/537c087338002fbde63399b5f420cedd/photo_packers_aj_hawk_flips_off_rams_sideline.jpg

[Harlan Huckleby]

http://o.onionstatic.com/images/articles/article/26/26217/NIB-Fan-R_jpg_635x345_crop-smart_upscale_q85.jpg
Look at view out of that window. Rustic. Birch trees. Birds singing.
Nice couch. Lots of little pillows. Life is good.

[pbmax]

No worries. Football Outsiders has us ranked 14th in rushing offense for the year and the #2 offense overall.

Last year it was 11th. Things never stay the same in the NFL, even in-season, and the Packers schedule does get tougher (previous schedule ranked 29th toughest, future schedule is 13th) but its not a tire fire yet.

[Guiness]

that is a photo, not a wall poster.


ALSO AVAILABLE IN 11X14 16X20 AND 20X24

I'd call 20x24 a poster. Not a classy Packer Rats poster like yourself, but a poster none the less.

[MJZiggy]

Love the creative use of the Angry Bird.

[woodbuck27]

Hey, it would be great if we could improve in run offense and pass defense, but it's hard for a team to be good in everything. Sometimes teams have to specialize in certain areas to maximize their talent. Or give up one thing to be great at another. Maybe the run blocking talent just isn't that good. Wells isn't a road grader, Sitton should be good at everything (although he's having a slightly down year), Clifton was never a good run blocker, Lang and Newhouse are new starters, and Bulaga has been hurt. If given the choice, I'd rather have an average run blocking OL and great pass blocking OL--rather than the reverse.

"If given the choice, I'd rather have an average run blocking OL and great pass blocking OL--rather than the reverse." HarveyWallbangers

Especially on this edition of the Green Bay Packers.

[Gunakor]

I want to see an improved running game whether they win lose or draw.


Lose or draw are not an option. Improving the run game at the cost of wins is simply not okay.

[Pugger]

No, it is just bad pad level. ;)

I know but if you can't practice run blocking enough during the week how can you expect it to get any better on Sundays?

[Pugger]

Here's some fodder to soothe your sad searching soul Harlan.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oB3mp7-EYW0

I remember those days too. Are we dating ourselves here? ;-)

[HarveyWallbangers]

All we need to fix the running game is another guy like this.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXtH26U1Q0o

[Harlan Huckleby]

I'd call 20x24 a poster. Not a classy Packer Rats poster like yourself, but a poster none the less.
OK, they blow the pic up. The only salve for this wound would be the big, classic wall poster. I saw one a few years ago for something like $300, and I don't love my brother that much.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Lose or draw are not an option. Improving the run game at the cost of wins is simply not okay.
Oh come on. It is possible for a pass-first team to have a credible running game, the packers developed an OK run attack during their stretch run last year. Hopefully they will do so again.

I've seen this all before. When the Packers are losing, the devoted fans call for coaches to be fired, specific players are scape-goated, the play calling is terrible, etc.

When the team is winning, all criticism ist verbotten, especially of the high priest of the packer church, TT, The Great White Father. "Shutup, they're winning."

Well, out of such stifling human muck sometimes arises a Great Thinker, a man of independent thought: Galileo. Bob McGinn. Copernicus. Cliff Crystl. Pablo Picasso. Cleff Crusty. Einstein. And today, Harlan Huckleby.

[Harlan Huckleby]

All we need to fix the running game is another guy like this. Last I heard, he was still playing football in the Arena league or something. Well, a couple years ago anyway. That guy must be crazy.

[Scott Campbell]

Well, out of such stifling human muck sometimes arises a Great Thinker, a man of independent thought: Galileo. Bob McGinn. Copernicus. Cliff Crystl. Pablo Picasso. Cleff Crusty. Einstein. And today, Harlan Huckleby.


None of those hacks won a Super Bowl.

[Gunakor]

Oh come on. It is possible for a pass-first team to have a credible running game, the packers developed an OK run attack during their stretch run last year. Hopefully they will do so again.

I've seen this all before. When the Packers are losing, the devoted fans call for coaches to be fired, specific players are scape-goated, the play calling is terrible, etc.

When the team is winning, all criticism ist verbotten, especially of the high priest of the packer church, TT, The Great White Father. "Shutup, they're winning."

Well, out of such stifling human muck sometimes arises a Great Thinker, a man of independent thought: Galileo. Bob McGinn. Copernicus. Cliff Crystl. Pablo Picasso. Cleff Crusty. Einstein. And today, Harlan Huckleby.


No, the running game didn't suddenly come on during their stretch run. They had ONE good game on the ground. One. Against Philadelphia. Other than that it was a bunch of 60-70 yard performances from Starks. Performances that have been equalled by the tandem of backs employed to start 2011. We won in spite of that then, and we're winning in spite of that now.

We're not talking about simply a pass first team here in Green Bay. It's pass first, pass second, and then run third - but only to keep everybody from rushing 7 guys on every first and second. And quite frankly, it's hard to argue the results. There is absolutely nothing wrong with our run game right now. It keeps defenses honest, which is all it's supposed to do. We call run plays so AR can run play action and hit Greg Jennings for 80 yard TD passes. Which, by the way, is far more exciting than watching a bull run into a brick wall.

[Fritz]

I say we fire Shawn Slocum, the Kurt Schottenheimer of our time.

Not only will that automatically fix special teams, it might help the running game and fix Greece's problems, too.

[Scott Campbell]

No, the running game didn't suddenly come on during their stretch run. They had ONE good game on the ground. One. Against Philadelphia. Other than that it was a bunch of 60-70 yard performances from Starks. Performances that have been equalled by the tandem of backs employed to start 2011. We won in spite of that then, and we're winning in spite of that now.

We're not talking about simply a pass first team here in Green Bay. It's pass first, pass second, and then run third - but only to keep everybody from rushing 7 guys on every first and second. And quite frankly, it's hard to argue the results. There is absolutely nothing wrong with our run game right now. It keeps defenses honest, which is all it's supposed to do. We call run plays so AR can run play action and hit Greg Jennings for 80 yard TD passes. Which, by the way, is far more exciting than watching a bull run into a brick wall.


It's hard to argue the results until winter weather you forces you to run the ball more. Then what?

[mraynrand]

It's hard to argue the results until winter weather you forces you to run the ball more. Then what?


Nothing. Packers can run their offense in bad weather. The greatest enemy is wind - and last Sunday v. Rams might be as bad as it gets.

Plus, I think the Packers can run better as well. Is San Fran really all that much better at running the ball? Do they really have better talent. Frank Gore that much better than Grant or the Stark plug? Still, SF gashed Detroit - in their place - for a lot of yards right into their teeth. Running the ball is mentality and blocking. Stubby can get them there, but there's no need right now - they are just too deadly doing what they do best. So long as they can pass protect, the run game is not that critical. But I still think they can grind it out if need be.

[vince]

Last year Rodgers averaged about a half pass a game more before Thanksgiving than after. Both rounded to 33 passes/game.

They averaged 25 rushes/game in September, October and November and 29 rushes a game in December, January and February. Their yards/attempt was virtually identical at 3.8 both early and late.

So far this year, Starks and Grant have combined to average just under 4.3 yds/attempt.

[Harlan Huckleby]

We won in spite of that then, and we're winning in spite of that now... There is absolutely nothing wrong with our run game right now . I'm not getting through to you morons.

Maybe the running game is good enough now to win games. Fine. That does not mean the running game is close to being as good as it can be. The blocking is lousy. I want to see a better running game FOR ENTERTAINMENT PURPOSES.

[Pugger]

I'd like to see a running game that can get a couple of yards when we really need them - like in 3rd and short.

[Upnorth]

I say we fire Shawn Slocum, the Kurt Schottenheimer of our time.

Not only will that automatically fix special teams, it might help the running game and fix Greece's problems, too.

I believe it was Slocum who started the whole sub prime crisis. He should be fired on general principale. I wish some one could get in touch with the fire ted thompson nut and convice him to target his ire at scrotum. Thats a cause I could get behind.

[Upnorth]

We have an average ground game. If our passing game was not a huge threat our ground game would be below average. Long story short I would love to see a dominant ground game, but efficent is all we need. Efficent is what we got.

[steve823]

Name one team that has a dominant passing game and running game. I'm happy with the Pack having a deadly passing attack and using the run to keep the defense honest. Some people are just too greedy..we can't be the best at everything it's not Madden

[Pugger]

Name one team that has a dominant passing game and running game. I'm happy with the Pack having a deadly passing attack and using the run to keep the defense honest. Some people are just too greedy..we can't be the best at everything it's not Madden

I don't know if we wish we had a dominate running game but it would be nice if we were a little more efficient at it and could get the yards when we really need them. It would also be great if we could run the ball especially late in the 4th quarter and get a couple of first downs to seal a victory.

[steve823]

I don't know if we wish we had a dominate running game but it would be nice if we were a little more efficient at it and could get the yards when we really need them. It would also be great if we could run the ball especially late in the 4th quarter and get a couple of first downs to seal a victory.

I get your point and agree to a certain degree. While it would be nice to be able to run the clock down or run it and know we will get the first, I still think teams should do what they are best at. Packers can pass the ball exceptionally well and should stick to their strength. Not to say that we shouldn't ever run, but sometimes it's best to stick with what works.

Also, I don't think our running game is necessarily as bad as people on this board are making it out to be. We have a solid duo in Starks/Grant who are both averaging a respectable 4.3 yards per carry. While me might not be able to run it willingly on our opponents and shove the ball down their throat, our RB's do a decent job with the room they get when defenses try to focus on our passing game.

[Fritz]

Harlan, if you're interested in seeing certain aspects of the game for entertainment purposes, why not tune in to the lingerie league? You might see a lot of gashing there.

[Gunakor]

It's hard to argue the results until winter weather you forces you to run the ball more. Then what?


Exactly what the Packers did in the NFCCG in Chicago. Throw the ball to Greg Jennings.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Harlan, if you're interested in seeing certain aspects of the game for entertainment purposes, why not tune in to the lingerie league? You might see a lot of gashing there. I don't know, the pygmy football league might be funnier. I'd rather watch cunning runts than running ladies.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I'm happy with the Pack having a deadly passing attack and using the run to keep the defense honest. Ya, but they can execute the running game a lot better than they are.


To mercifully change the topic a bit: I would love to see the nfl report the median ypc as well as the average ypc. (median means if they had 40 runs, what was the 20th longest one.) That stat gives a much better indication of what you can expect from a typical run.

Sounds like a picky point, but the average ypc gets so skewed by a couple big runs. The advantage of the average is that it gives credit for the back who is capable of breaking a long one, valuable because that threat keeps defenses in check more.

It would be useful to see both the median and the average.

[ThunderDan]

The first time I see a safety get blocked, I will cancel the jihad.

Even in a perfectly designed run game, hat-on-hat, there will always be 2 guys not blocked. They usually are the Safeties. You will probably have that jihad if you were a fan of any NFL team.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Even in a perfectly designed run game, hat-on-hat, there will always be 2 guys not blocked. They usually are the Safeties. ya, that's true. usually the back has to beat a linebacker to get 4+ yards and beat a safety too to get 8+.

Just because a team is winning doesn't mean all phases of their game are strong. Packers can improve on downfield blocking, its a question of attitude, maybe they are complacent because they have superman winging the passes.

[ThunderDan]

ya, that's true. usually the back has to beat a linebacker to get 4+ yards and beat a safety too to get 8+.

Just because a team is winning doesn't mean all phases of their game are strong. Packers can improve on downfield blocking, its a question of attitude, maybe they are complacent because they have superman winging the passes.

When did I say the bolded above? I stated that there will always be free defensive players on a running play. Usually it is the safeties because they are lined up the farthest from the line of scrimmage and the hardest to effectively engage. Hence no need for a jahid.

In the run game the O almost never accounts for the safeties unless a team is putting 8 in the box. The O "leaves" it to the RB to beat the safey 1-on-1.

[ThunderDan]

To me the Packers run game has been fine this year. It does exactly what it is supposed to do which is to take pressure off of the passing game. The Packers are a passing team and built to win games with the pass. We would not have as much tied up in WR contracts if that wasn't the fact. The Packers were spending $16.99M on the WRs before Jordy was extended. We are only spending $7.28M on our RBs and Grant gets the largest share by far with Kuhn coming in 2nd. Straks and Green don't make $1M combined. Adrian Peterson now makes more than our whole RB corps. Our team isn't built to run the ball down the other teams' throats to win games.

[Fritz]

Can any team run the ball down the other team's throat to win a game any more?

The Jest? What's their pass/run ratio?

[ThunderDan]

Can any team run the ball down the other team's throat to win a game any more?

The Jest? What's their pass/run ratio?

Given the status of certain QBs in the league here is a list of teams that I feel need to run it down the other teams throat.
Oakland, Baltimore, NY Jets, NY Giants, Jacksonville, Miami, MINN, SF, KC

Here is a list of teams I think can run it down the other teams throat.
Oakland, MINN, Buff, SF

PHI has the #1 run game in the league at 170 ypg but it "seems" like Vick has a lot to do with that.

[Harlan Huckleby]

To me the Packers run game has been fine this year. It does exactly what it is supposed to do which is to take pressure off of the passing game. Since the team is undefeated, you can stand by this conclusion if you don't want to look any deeper. If you are a football fan that watches the games closely, you'll notice the run blocking is shoddy. The best sports writers, such as McGinn & Chrystl, have made this observation. The coaches are perfectly aware that the run game needs work.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/undefeated-packers-have-imperfections-to-fix-132028948.html

In describing one of those areas - the running game - McCarthy stated that it's not exactly the way it's supposed to look right now.

The running game has been the soft spot in an offense that throws the ball as efficiently as any in the NFL, protects its star quarterback, is tied for the league lead in receptions of 40 or more yards and ranks first in scoring.
The victory over the Rams begged for the Packers to come out in the second half and dominate the game with their running attack. Ahead, 24-3, at halftime, the Packers should have been able to pound away on first and second down against a defense ranked dead last in the NFL in rushing yards allowed.

Instead, their backs gained just 43 yards and three first downs on 14 carries. From his standpoint, offensive coordinator Joe Philbin didn't see his offensive line sustaining blocks and giving Ryan Grant and James Starks much room to run.

"You have to block and break tackles," offensive coordinator Joe Philbin said. "I don't want to say it's all on the offensive linemen and that they're not blocking worth a lick. It's certainly more than that. The run game productivity overall has to get better."
Saying the cause was right tackle Bryan Bulaga playing in his first game back from a knee injury or Marshall Newhouse starting his first game at left tackle would be an excuse because there were breakdowns all over the line.


Our team isn't built to run the ball down the other teams' throats to win games. No kidding? The run game still needs work, the shortcomings have been masked (to the casual or idiot fan) by the success of the pass game.

edit: to be clear, you strike me as a very casual sort of guy. the idiots are other people.

[mraynrand]

:taunt::taunt::taunt::taunt:

"Pack can't run to close out a game." Nyah Nyah Nyah!

http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/funny-pictures-cat-makes-a-raspberry-at-you1.jpg

[gbgary]

ran very effectively today. loved the straight ahead bull-rush type plays.

[pbmax]

Stars last six carries: 55 yards and two first downs. And that includes a -1 yard run where Newhouse fell down while blocking no one.

[Harlan Huckleby]

The line blocked well for running game, at least they sealed off pretty well for Starks to run outside. Starks is pretty good if he can get out of backfield. Grant is quicker getting to hole, but goes down easily.

[woodbuck27]

Since the team is undefeated, you can stand by this conclusion if you don't want to look any deeper. If you are a football fan that watches the games closely, you'll notice the run blocking is shoddy. The best sports writers, such as McGinn & Chrystl, have made this observation. The coaches are perfectly aware that the run game needs work.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/undefeated-packers-have-imperfections-to-fix-132028948.html

In describing one of those areas - the running game - McCarthy stated that it's not exactly the way it's supposed to look right now.

The running game has been the soft spot in an offense that throws the ball as efficiently as any in the NFL, protects its star quarterback, is tied for the league lead in receptions of 40 or more yards and ranks first in scoring.
The victory over the Rams begged for the Packers to come out in the second half and dominate the game with their running attack. Ahead, 24-3, at halftime, the Packers should have been able to pound away on first and second down against a defense ranked dead last in the NFL in rushing yards allowed.

Instead, their backs gained just 43 yards and three first downs on 14 carries. From his standpoint, offensive coordinator Joe Philbin didn't see his offensive line sustaining blocks and giving Ryan Grant and James Starks much room to run.

"You have to block and break tackles," offensive coordinator Joe Philbin said. "I don't want to say it's all on the offensive linemen and that they're not blocking worth a lick. It's certainly more than that. The run game productivity overall has to get better."
Saying the cause was right tackle Bryan Bulaga playing in his first game back from a knee injury or Marshall Newhouse starting his first game at left tackle would be an excuse because there were breakdowns all over the line.

No kidding? The run game still needs work, the shortcomings have been masked (to the casual or idiot fan) by the success of the pass game.

edit: to be clear, you strike me as a very casual sort of guy. the idiots are other people.

"You have to block and break tackles," offensive coordinator Joe Philbin said.


"I don't want to say it's all on the offensive linemen and that they're not blocking worth a lick. It's certainly more than that. The run game productivity overall has to get better." offensive coordinator Joe Philbin

[woodbuck27]

Then there's this:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/nfl/gameflash/2011/10/23/4496_recap.html#ixzz1bfLCCesI

Rodgers helps Pack stay unbeaten, top Vikes 33-27MINNEAPOLIS (AP) --

Rodgers kept Green Bay unbeaten with three touchdowns and 335 yards passing, holding off Minnesota 33-27 on Sunday.

"There's not a lot of panic in this team. We've been down a couple times at halftime. Just a lot of focus," said Rodgers, who completed his first 13 passes and finished 24 for 30 on another near-unstoppable afternoon against a depleted secondary.

"We expect nothing less," said Greg Jennings , who had seven catches for 147 yards. He jogged in for a 79-yard score on the second play of the second half after an egregiously blown coverage, giving the Packers their first lead at 20-17.


Adrian Peterson helped him out by rushing 24 times for 175 yards and a touchdown for the Vikings (1-6)

but James Starks put the game away with two big gains for first downs before the 2-minute warning and another one right after. He had 75 yards on 13 carries for the Packers (7-0).

"It's frustrating to come out against the defending champs and be that close and not to come up with the win," Peterson said. "Give credit to those guys. They made plays when they needed to, and we ended up on the wrong side of it."

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/nfl/gameflash/2011/10/23/4496_recap.html#ixzz1bhJb3rpz

THE PACKERS RE NOW 7 and 0.

"We're the only team in the league that's got that goose egg behind us. We've just got to stay humble and don't get complacent." Jay Fin

NEXT week The Carolina PANTHERS. They should sound SCARY.

[mmmdk]

I expect better running from now on; especially at Lambeau. With that said...passing is the ONLY force that can bring the 5th Lombardi trophy to Green Bay this season.

[Harlan Huckleby]

:taunt::taunt::taunt::taunt:

"Pack can't run to close out a game." Nyah Nyah Nyah!

The Pack finally ran well yesterday, demonstrating that the run game needed to improve. Don't be so hard on the people who said everything is fine, they are still learning.

[ThunderDan]

The Pack finally ran well yesterday, demonstrating that the run game needed to improve. Don't be so hard on the people who said everything is fine, they are still learning.

Really??? The Packers ran well and we won????

Before the last drive we put up 33 points and had 19 rushes for 60 yards or 3.16 ypc. Which is significantly lower than our 3.8 ypc average for the year. Those 19 carries, which were fine, allowed our offensive to be balanced enough to open up our dominant passing attack.

Obviously you don't pay attention to the game. One series does not make your running game, "ran well yesterday."

[Harlan Huckleby]

Starks ran well, Grant had a load in his pants. I thought the line blocked better than in past games.

[Upnorth]

We ran efficently, that is all. Fortunatly that is all we need as well with our passing attack. I would love to see a consistent 4 ypc. If we hit that I dont see how anyone could stop our O short of torential downpour.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I find it kind of boring. Rodgers is so damn good, it doesn't matter if the D or running game are excellent.

Face it, the games last year were more fun when the team was struggling a bit.

[mraynrand]

I find it kind of boring. Rodgers is so damn good, it doesn't matter if the D or running game are excellent.

Face it, the games last year were more fun when the team was struggling a bit.

The game would be much more interesting if the announcers were better than dog excrement. It would have been interesting to see why Finley wasn't getting the ball. Was he being doubled? Were the LBs just that good in coverage? Can you show us some secondary tape? Or, did you notice that AP racked up 175 yards while your were describing the beautiful bouquet of Ponder's anal effluvia? The game was exciting. Aikman made it boring.

[Harlan Huckleby]

The TV presentations are often annoying. They are too busy promoting other network events, or showing scores from other games.

I like the Sunday and Monday night broadcasts because at least it is the only game on, and they take more times for replays and discussions of what's going on in the game at hand.

[Gunakor]

I find it kind of boring. Rodgers is so damn good, it doesn't matter if the D or running game are excellent.

Face it, the games last year were more fun when the team was struggling a bit.


Sorry you aren't entertained. I'm ecstatic. I've never seen a Green Bay team start 7-0 before in my lifetime. Winning is entertaining.

I'd rather watch a boring win than an exciting loss 19 Sundays a year. 19-0 guarantees a ring. 200 rushing yards per game does not. The means to win are not important. Winning itself is the only thing that matters.

[MJZiggy]

Sorry you aren't entertained. I'm ecstatic. I've never seen a Green Bay team start 7-0 before in my lifetime. Winning is entertaining.

I'd rather watch a boring win than an exciting loss 19 Sundays a year. 19-0 guarantees a ring. 200 rushing yards per game does not. The means to win are not important. Winning itself is the only thing that matters. The means become important when factoring them into deciding the probability of the next win. I want a stronger running game and am happy that Capers is not happy with the defense because it means they will work to improve them by the next game, thus decreasing our chances of getting steamrolled when a team on its own winning tear comes to town.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Winning itself is the only thing that matters. True if you are playing the game. Not so much if you are just watching on TV.

[woodbuck27]

Really??? The Packers ran well and we won????

Before the last drive we put up 33 points and had 19 rushes for 60 yards or 3.16 ypc. Which is significantly lower than our 3.8 ypc average for the year. Those 19 carries, which were fine, allowed our offensive to be balanced enough to open up our dominant passing attack.

Obviously you don't pay attention to the game. One series does not make your running game, "ran well yesterday."

As I recall it the last time we ran the ball well with any consistency was when we had Ahman Green as OUR chief RB. Ahman Green was a super pickup from Seattle as I recall that acquisition. A dominant RB that balanced Favre's passing attack.

GO PACKERS!

[Gunakor]

The means become important when factoring them into deciding the probability of the next win.


This is for fans. I get it. Good for water cooler chats and all. Great for Vegas. But in reality has nothing to do with football, and is of little entertainment value to me. Too many variables from week to week. The means to the outcome of a game today don't apply the same in next weeks game. But that's not really relevant to what I find entertaining. I don't engage in much water cooler chat. A win is a win. Win-loss records aren't given in fractions depending on the means to the outcome. As long as we're winning then I'm entertained.

I'm not too happy with the defense right now. It'll be tough to win games 42-38 in late December. The defense needs work, especially in getting to the QB. But as far as the run game is concerned, 20 carries a game for 80 hard earned yards is plenty enough to keep a defense honest. An honest defense is vulnerable to play action. That's why we call run plays. So as long as the play action is working, the run game is working. As long as play action is working, odds are we're scoring a lot of points and winning most of our games. And as long as we're winning games I'm thoroughly entertained.

[Gunakor]

True if you are playing the game. Not so much if you are just watching on TV.


Speak for yourself. I'd rather watch a boring win than an exciting loss 19 times a year.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I'd rather rake leaves than watch 19 boring football games.

I like winning, 19 losses is not the alternative. I'll take a 14-2 exciting season over a 16-0 snooze fest.

[vince]

You'd rather bitch and moan than watch football - good or bad. Doesn't a dynamic passing attack combined with a running game that can improve and a defense that gives up too many big plays make the games more interesting? Who ya crappin'?

[Harlan Huckleby]

oh, fuck you. Just because I point out the obvious, the running emperor has no clothes, that is "bitching and moaning" to the true believers.

I don't even know what you are talking about, frankly. All I said was I like competitive games.

[mraynrand]

All I said was I like competitive games.

So you enjoyed the Packer game Sunday and also MNF. The Jags "Won Ugly" - lol

The Sunday game between NO and Colts could only be fun for Saints fans and some fantasy geeks

[mraynrand]

I'd rather rake leaves than watch 19 boring football games.

I like winning, 19 losses is not the alternative. I'll take a 14-2 exciting season over a 16-0 snooze fest.

NE had some exciting games in their 16-0 run. Just because you win all your games, doesn't mean it isn't exciting. 14-2 sounds right, if there are no more major injuries. The Packers will drop a game or two. This is the NFL and good teams lose. Just ask the Ravens. Ha Ha!

[RashanGary]

oh, fuck you. Just because I point out the obvious, the running emperor has no clothes, that is "bitching and moaning" to the true believers.

I don't even know what you are talking about, frankly. All I said was I like competitive games.

I'm bored too. Playoffs will get exciting. I sit around looking up stats for Woodson on the all time INT list and tracking AR's stats. Outside of Atlanta (and I didn't even watch that game because I had 4 hours of sleep in 2 days leading up to that game), nothing has even felt threatening.

Boring!


Playoffs should kick ass though. Good QB's on well oiled offenses are going to give us fits. If we get Neal back and he's the pass rusher many of us think he is, we should be good. If not, look out. This thing isn't a given.

[vince]

oh, fuck you. Just because I point out the obvious, the running emperor has no clothes, that is "bitching and moaning" to the true believers.

I don't even know what you are talking about, frankly. All I said was I like competitive games.
I'm just fucking with you Harlan because I know you can take it and give it back. I for one am glad you're posting again. Oh and fuck you too!

[Harlan Huckleby]

So you enjoyed the Packer game Sunday and also MNF. The Jags "Won Ugly" - lol

The Sunday game between NO and Colts could only be fun for Saints fans and some fantasy geeks

Hey, I enjoyed the Jags game! The announcers kept saying the game was awful, I was yelling STFU back at um. I love a train wreck. I love rain on a parade, only thing better would be a lightening strike on one of the floats.

The Packer-Rams game practically bored my tits off. The Packer-Vikings game was fun because the Vikings had a small chance of winning.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I'm just fucking with you Harlan because I know you can take it and give it back. I for one am glad you're posting again. Oh and fuck you too!

listen you kicked me right in the nuts, cleats first. I'm too smart/big of a man to retaliate, I'll let the ref take care of you.

Madtown!?

[Harlan Huckleby]

I'm bored too. Playoffs will get exciting.

Check out the Badgers. Did you watch Michigan State game? (I'm guessing you had no date for Saturday night, but correct me if I am wrong.) I loved that game, and gave only a modest poop that they lost in the end.

Badger-Ohio State going be great this Saturday night, if again you have no date. Ohio State much better than their record, they have good players and are coming around.

[woodbuck27]

So you enjoyed the Packer game Sunday and also MNF. The Jags "Won Ugly" - lol

The Sunday game between NO and Colts could only be fun for Saints fans and some fantasy geeks

Dam that stinking result cost me the lead in the Pro Pickem'. I'd have bet the wife if I had one, the RAVENS would have scorched the Jags. I believe I read somewhere in here that the Jags didn't even have a first down in that game so I assumed the Ravens won HUGE.

I was wrong again. (-:

PACKERS !

[mraynrand]

Hey, I enjoyed the Jags game! The announcers kept saying the game was awful, I was yelling STFU back at um. I love a train wreck. I love rain on a parade, only thing better would be a lightening strike on one of the floats.

The Packer-Rams game practically bored my tits off. The Packer-Vikings game was fun because the Vikings had a small chance of winning.

I watched the entire second half of the Ravens Jags game. I loved the hard hitting football. I also wondered if Kampy wold even get a sniff of Flacco.

I mentioned in one of the Bears forums, that it's fun when the Packers punk the Bears or Vikings, but it's not that memorable of a game. The memorable games are the down to the wire games, won and lost of blocked field goals or goal-line fumble recoveries, or games where some idiot Bears fan jumps thirty feet from the stands to catch a football going through the uprights!

[channtheman]

When I visited Green Bay last Winter to see the Bears game at Lambeau my dumbshit Uncle said he would rather "lose a close game than win in a blowout." I can understand saying "I'd rather win a close game than win a blowout," but I can't understand ever rather losing when winning is the alternative.

[mraynrand]

When I visited Green Bay last Winter to see the Bears game at Lambeau my dumbshit Uncle said he would rather "lose a close game than win in a blowout." I can understand saying "I'd rather win a close game than win a blowout," but I can't understand ever rather losing when winning is the alternative.

:cnf:

[woodbuck27]

I watched the entire second half of the Ravens Jags game. I loved the hard hitting football. I also wondered if Kampy wold even get a sniff of Flacco.

I mentioned in one of the Bears forums, that it's fun when the Packers punk the Bears or Vikings, but it's not that memorable of a game. The memorable games are the down to the wire games, won and lost of blocked field goals or goal-line fumble recoveries, or games where some idiot Bears fan jumps thirty feet from the stands to catch a football going through the uprights!

That's ... an OFFICIAL ... NFL game football. HUGE!

Until ... he lands snap dab into the lap of some really BIG Bears fan's galfriend and really takes a pounding.

PACKERS !

[vince]

listen you kicked me right in the nuts, cleats first. I'm too smart/big of a man to retaliate, I'll let the ref take care of you.

Madtown!?
You remind me of that Falcon lineman flopping like a wet fish after pushing Hawk in the back after the whistle. And the ref didn't see either infraction. He's taking an extended siesta after getting his hands on some good maui wowi and labrador.

[Harlan Huckleby]

When I visited Green Bay last Winter to see the Bears game at Lambeau my dumbshit Uncle said he would rather "lose a close game than win in a blowout." I can understand saying "I'd rather win a close game than win a blowout," but I can't understand ever rather losing when winning is the alternative.
:cnf:
I understood what he was saying. I think Rick Perry said the same thing in a debate.

[Harlan Huckleby]

You remind me of that Falcon lineman flopping like a wet fish after pushing Hawk in the back after the whistle. And the ref didn't see either infraction. He's taking an extended siesta after getting his hands on some good maui wowi and labrador. that's right, yuck it up. It just so happens that Madtown is a very good friend of mine, and I expect you'll be taking an extended siesta of your own.

[vince]

that's right, yuck it up. It just so happens that Madtown is a very good friend of mine, and I expect you'll be taking an extended siesta of your own.
You're the Chong to his Cheech alright.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFwtWaONcN8

[woodbuck27]

that's right, yuck it up. It just so happens that Madtown is a very good friend of mine, and I expect you'll be taking an extended siesta of your own.

Ahhh NO!

Come on Packer fans. (-: