Pink Elephant in the room

[KYPack]

Went to the game.

Didn't catch this bit until I watched the replay on DVR.

MM and ARod really went at one another on the sideline. What is the scuttlebutt on this exchange? The plays that were sent in prior to the squabble really did suck. Is our QB-coach relationship unraveling or what?

Tell me what's up all you insiders and local yokels.

[swede]

Went to the game.

Didn't catch this bit until I watched the replay on DVR.

MM and ARod really went at one another on the sideline. What is the scuttlebutt on this exchange? The plays that were sent in prior to the squabble really did suck. Is our QB-coach relationship unraveling or what?

Tell me what's up all you insiders and local yokels.

I thought MM practically threw his team under the bus in his locker room comments with Larry McCarren. If I know the play calling tendencies I am sure the opposing D coordinator is on top of it. MM's head is worrying me as much as the offensive line. FIRST AND GOAL AT THE FIVE AND YOU RUN A PASS PLAY FOR AN INCOMPLETE. When might it be a good time to run the ball?

You know what lesson Mike will take from this game? Next year he will change the team bus routes and breakfast schedules against AFC opponents.

[Cheesehead Craig]

Went to the game.

Didn't catch this bit until I watched the replay on DVR.

MM and ARod really went at one another on the sideline. What is the scuttlebutt on this exchange? The plays that were sent in prior to the squabble really did suck. Is our QB-coach relationship unraveling or what?

Tell me what's up all you insiders and local yokels.

I think they were both frustrated that the pass game wasn't working. Nothing wrong with the HC and QB venting during a game. They really don't do it very often so I don't see anything to worry about.

[mraynrand]

I thought MM practically threw his team under the bus in his locker room comments with Larry McCarren.


Please elaborate.

[mraynrand]

Speaking of pink, can we have breast cancer awareness in Oct without the pink on the uniforms? I'll double my ACS donation if they promise not to wear pink. Especially Stubby.

[Patler]

It didn't look like that big of a deal to me.

[red]

It didn't look like that big of a deal to me.

they didn't show most of it on TV i guess.

they showed the one clip, then buck or troy made the comment that things really escalated from there

i mentioned in another thread that where there's smoke there's fire. people just don't blow up like that out of the blue, i think somethings been building up for awhile now

[pbmax]

They showed a good deal of it. Not the beginning, but they ran through the point that Raji and Cobb broke it up. While I don't think this incident is particularly interesting, I do think this kind of public disagreement has become more common between the two. And its usually Rodgers who instigates.

[swede]

Please elaborate.

In a game where we were up by 16 in the 3rd quarter the coach can take some responsibility. Instead of shrugging off the questions that pointed fingers at *Ross, **Franklin, ***the line, ****the receivers, *****and defensive players with personal foul penalties he agreed with the questioner and called out Perry in particular. That was an interesting game, but it was a game that shows that McCarthy's team is not ready yet. Usually MM is a stand up guy and yesterday he was pointing fingers at individual players.

*Ross sucks, but he wasn't the one dumb enough to keep him at KO return.
**Did Franklin get the ball cleanly?
***Okay, the line might have not deserved the coach's protection, but it never hurts to give it to them anyway.
****Same as above.
*****He really singled out Perry for a public flogging on the late hit.

[pbmax]

I dunno swede. Shrugging off those questions is pretty par for the course. He is not going to take the blame for every bum play. Some of those players deserve some part of the blame and McCarthy simply avoided piling on.

Perry's hit, on review was about as dumb as it gets. Borderline late and he drives his helmet down. He should have been called out.

[swede]

I dunno swede. Shrugging off those questions is pretty par for the course. He is not going to take the blame for every bum play. Some of those players deserve some part of the blame and McCarthy simply avoided piling on.

Perry's hit, on review was about as dumb as it gets. Borderline late and he drives his helmet down. He should have been called out.

I thought he did pile on. I was more angry at McCarthy than the players after the game, and I thought he let the fingers be pointed at individuals. I should not have said that he pointed the finger at players.

Well, I would have forgiven him if he would have said, "Oh, and I don't think I had my best day either."
http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images_root/images/photos/000/751/583/RackMultipart.14819.0_crop_340x234.jpg?1257853954

[Maxie the Taxi]

Stubby looked shell-shocked after the game, almost like he was surprised it was over. Maybe he thought Rodgers batted pass to Jones came on third and five.

[mraynrand]

Swede, I was counting on you to be a dispassionate reporter about locker room events, and you've let me down. But I share the blame for blindly believing you.

[swede]

Well, he allowed Larry to blame the loss on the mistakes of individual players as long as his own performance seemed to be going unexamined.

That wasn't my most honest post and I'm going to work on that over the bye week.

[mraynrand]

Well, he allowed Larry to blame the loss on the mistakes of individual players as long as his own performance seemed to be going unexamined.

That wasn't my most honest post and I'm going to work on that over the bye week.

Let's get that fixed.

I'm still confused about how Larry can intentionally point his stinky pinky at anyone

http://www.gunandgame.com/forums/attachments/powder-keg/36804d1292558788-i-broke-my-pinkie-larry2.jpg

[Freak Out]

On the 4th down run/fumble that was returned for a touchdown what was the FG distance if he sent Missin Mason out there? I was pissed he went for it instead of giving his kicker a shot. Crosby had been dead on in his other kicks. Plus a rookie dive...? Maybe with Lacy but fuck...that was a passing down for the Packers. Roll Rogers out.

[mraynrand]

On the 4th down run/fumble that was returned for a touchdown what was the FG distance if he sent Missin Mason out there? I was pissed he went for it instead of giving his kicker a shot. Crosby had been dead on in his other kicks. Plus a rookie dive...? Maybe with Lacy but fuck...that was a passing down for the Packers. Roll Rogers out.

I think it was the point differential that drove the decision. Make the FG, and you're still not up by two scores and can be beat by a TD. Miss the FG or don't get the first down and you are up by a FG and can still be beat with a TD and only tied with FG. Stubby could have punted, but probably lost confidence in defense....

[Freak Out]

I'll take a six point lead and the defense for $200 Alex.

[Patler]

In a game where we were up by 16 in the 3rd quarter the coach can take some responsibility. Instead of shrugging off the questions that pointed fingers at *Ross, **Franklin, ***the line, ****the receivers, *****and defensive players with personal foul penalties he agreed with the questioner and called out Perry in particular. That was an interesting game, but it was a game that shows that McCarthy's team is not ready yet. Usually MM is a stand up guy and yesterday he was pointing fingers at individual players.

*Ross sucks, but he wasn't the one dumb enough to keep him at KO return.
**Did Franklin get the ball cleanly?
***Okay, the line might have not deserved the coach's protection, but it never hurts to give it to them anyway.
****Same as above.
*****He really singled out Perry for a public flogging on the late hit.

Is the interview available to be seen/heard somewhere?

[Joemailman]

On the 4th down run/fumble that was returned for a touchdown what was the FG distance if he sent Missin Mason out there? I was pissed he went for it instead of giving his kicker a shot. Crosby had been dead on in his other kicks. Plus a rookie dive...? Maybe with Lacy but fuck...that was a passing down for the Packers. Roll Rogers out.

It would have been a 48 yard field goal, I believe into the wind which at times was fairly strong. I think going for it was the right move, but I agree it was the wrong play call. They ran right into the strength of the Bengals defense. Roll Rodgers out and give him the run/pass option.

[pbmax]

Well, he allowed Larry to blame the loss on the mistakes of individual players as long as his own performance seemed to be going unexamined.

That wasn't my most honest post and I'm going to work on that over the bye week.

Remember your pad level.

[pbmax]

It would have been a 48 yard field goal, I believe into the wind which at times was fairly strong. I think going for it was the right move, but I agree it was the wrong play call. They ran right into the strength of the Bengals defense. Roll Rodgers out and give him the run/pass option.

McCarthy said yesterday it was a consideration and the ball was inside the make line Crosby had given him. Somewhere, and I have no original source on this (might have been locker-room audio on the radio today) it was suggested Ross was fooled by the wind but McCarthy said they had a feel for it pregame.

This is the link for his post-game presser, but if McCarren got him separately, that will be elsewhere.

http://www.packers.com/media-center/videos/Mike-McCarthy-Tough-loss-game-of-peaks--valleys/2116c431-6bec-407c-bba6-216942da7bce

[KYPack]

It would have been a 48 yard field goal, I believe into the wind which at times was fairly strong. I think going for it was the right move, but I agree it was the wrong play call. They ran right into the strength of the Bengals defense. Roll Rodgers out and give him the run/pass option.

Gotta pull rank on ya Joe.

There was no wind + the kick would've been into the closed end of PBS.

The conditions were fine for a kick.

Now that doesn't mean Missin' would have made it, but that play call did suck.

[pbmax]

Gotta pull rank on ya Joe.

There was no wind + the kick would've been into the closed end of PBS.

The conditions were fine for a kick.

Now that doesn't mean Missin' would have made it, but that play call did suck.

No wind? Seemed like several of the kickoffs in that direction were shorter than toward the other end. Swirling maybe?

[Joemailman]

According to PFR, the wind at kickoff was 13 mph. http://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/201309220cin.htm

[red]

it sure as hell looked windy to me. thats what i assumed was screwing with all a-rods long passes

they blamed the botch kick return by ross on the wind knocking it down, and fat mike said after the game that the wind knocked it down but that was no excuse because they were dealing with the wind all pregame

maybe you were just blocked from the wind KY?

[Harlan Huckleby]

maybe you were just blocked from the wind KY?

He was sitting next to his wife.

[Cheesehead Craig]

On the 4th down run/fumble that was returned for a touchdown what was the FG distance if he sent Missin Mason out there? I was pissed he went for it instead of giving his kicker a shot. Crosby had been dead on in his other kicks. Plus a rookie dive...? Maybe with Lacy but fuck...that was a passing down for the Packers. Roll Rogers out.

I was ok with them going for it. They had shown they could run the ball very well during the game. They make that 4th down, they can run another 2 min off the clock, if not more with another first down after that and then the game is sealed.

If Crosby comes in and misses the kick, everyone here is screaming at MM for not trying to run the ball on that 4th and 1/2 yard when we had so much success with running.

The biggest issue for me was the 3 WR set. Everyone knows they were going to run the ball. Just get the damn TEs and a FB in there and stop being cute.

[KYPack]

it sure as hell looked windy to me. thats what i assumed was screwing with all a-rods long passes

they blamed the botch kick return by ross on the wind knocking it down, and fat mike said after the game that the wind knocked it down but that was no excuse because they were dealing with the wind all pregame

maybe you were just blocked from the wind KY?


My seats are in the South end next to Harlan's mom.

It wasn't windy in my seats, in fact, it was really warm during the game.

[Pugger]

I was ok with them going for it. They had shown they could run the ball very well during the game. They make that 4th down, they can run another 2 min off the clock, if not more with another first down after that and then the game is sealed.

If Crosby comes in and misses the kick, everyone here is screaming at MM for not trying to run the ball on that 4th and 1/2 yard when we had so much success with running.

The biggest issue for me was the 3 WR set. Everyone knows they were going to run the ball. Just get the damn TEs and a FB in there and stop being cute.

This is why I didn't have a problem with the call, just the execution of the call. The big guys were run blocking pretty well all day against a pretty stout D. Unfortunately the guys got beat at the worst possible moment. We really should give Cincy credit here for busting up that play. :sad:

Edit: we didn't have FB. Kuhn didn't play. I suppose we should have put a TE in there instead. :cnf:

[mraynrand]

My seats are in the South end next to Harlan's mom.

It wasn't windy in my seats, in fact, it was really warm during the game.

snuggling?

[Freak Out]

I was ok with them going for it. They had shown they could run the ball very well during the game. They make that 4th down, they can run another 2 min off the clock, if not more with another first down after that and then the game is sealed.

If Crosby comes in and misses the kick, everyone here is screaming at MM for not trying to run the ball on that 4th and 1/2 yard when we had so much success with running.

The biggest issue for me was the 3 WR set. Everyone knows they were going to run the ball. Just get the damn TEs and a FB in there and stop being cute.

How many short yardage situations did they have up to that point where they ran the ball (I honestly don't remember)? The run game works because the threat of the Passing attack sets it up not because the Packer offensive line blows guys off the line. I still think it was a stupid call and that Slocum should be fired for it.

[red]

i liked them going for it because a field goal still opens you up for a loss if they then march down the field and get a TD

i really didn't like the call though, i was expecting a QB sneak or something quick. i really didn't like running a play with what seemed like a very deep hand off when we just needed a couple inches

in the game thread i was calling for Raji to get in the game and either get the ball or lead block

[Bossman641]

I'm not gonna criticize the play call as it's too easy to second guess, but one thing I would have liked to see was for Rodgers to do a quick snap before the defense had time to really get set. I was hoping he would come to the line and quick snap a QB sneak.

[MadtownPacker]

My seats are in the South end next to Harlan's mom.

It wasn't windy in my seats, in fact, it was really warm during the game.
Does Momma Harlan require two seats like her lardass son?

[denverYooper]

How come it's a pink elephant. Was M3 drinking?

[cheesner]

I think it was the right call to go for it, however, I think they should have done a run wide. Franklin was doing an amazing job of accelerating and cutting up a crease. I'm sure he would have found something to gain a few yards anyhow. Rushing up the middle was going into the strength of the defense and not Franklin's strength.

[run pMc]

Agree with others -- right decision to go for it, wrong play call. In these situations, I really want them to just QB sneak it in there...are they afraid of Rodgers getting banged up on a sneak?
Love the idea of running Raji in there, BTW. You'd think they practiced some kind of jumbo play during the week knowing they'd only have 2 healthy RB's.

[Joemailman]

Agree with others -- right decision to go for it, wrong play call. In these situations, I really want them to just QB sneak it in there...are they afraid of Rodgers getting banged up on a sneak?
Love the idea of running Raji in there, BTW. You'd think they practiced some kind of jumbo play during the week knowing they'd only have 2 healthy RB's.

I think the QB sneaks pretty much ended with Rodgers' concussion in 2010. I don't think they should have run Franklin in there without a lead blocker. Especially an inexperienced rookie.

[denverYooper]

It's easy to say they shouldn't have run Franklin on that 4th and inches because we know the improbable outcome became the real result. The guy was having a whale of a game up to that point, though, so the decision was not hard and not a bad choice.

[Fritz]

Agree with others -- right decision to go for it, wrong play call. In these situations, I really want them to just QB sneak it in there...are they afraid of Rodgers getting banged up on a sneak?
Love the idea of running Raji in there, BTW. You'd think they practiced some kind of jumbo play during the week knowing they'd only have 2 healthy RB's.

To me, here's a key question: did Franklin have the first down, had he not fumbled? Or would he have been stuffed?

[Guiness]

To me, here's a key question: did Franklin have the first down, had he not fumbled? Or would he have been stuffed?

Looked like he was going to get easily stuffed.

[KYPack]

To me, here's a key question: did Franklin have the first down, had he not fumbled? Or would he have been stuffed?

Hope somebody saved the replay so they can answer.

I saw Johnathan pull a real good one on a kick-off. We were kicking in the first quarter. Franklin was R4 on the kick-off (4th from the right side of Masthay). I figured I'd watch this kid bc he's been such a flyin' flop so far. Franklin sprinted down to cover the kick. He closed on the ball carrier when a huge Bengal reserve LB ran right at Franklin with blood in his eyes. Franklin made the most chickenshit dive I've ever seen on an NFL field. It looked like he was sliding into second base.

The worst part was it was right in front of the Packer bench. He ran off with his head down, and grabbed some pine while staring at the ground.

I figured that was it for the dizzy sumbitch, they'll see that weak shit on film and cut this kid.

Turns out Franklin got in the game and morphed into an actual NFL player.

It was some other fool that got cut!

[Joemailman]

http://i1206.photobucket.com/albums/bb449/route25/ftanklin.jpg (http://s1206.photobucket.com/user/route25/media/ftanklin.jpg.html)

Here's my question about the play. Did Franklin get too high in thee air? he had to get his feet off the ground or he would have been tripping over his own linemen. But should he have been just trying to dive over the backs of the linemen instead of jumping up as high as he did? I know it's become a bit of a humorous cliche around here, but was his pad level too high?

[Guiness]

Here's my question about the play. Did Franklin get too high in thee air? he had to get his feet off the ground or he would have been tripping over his own linemen. But should he have been just trying to dive over the backs of the linemen instead of jumping up as high as he did? I know it's become a bit of a humorous cliche around here, but was his pad level too high?

There's nothing funny about pad level!:smack:

I think that photo does a pretty good job of answering the question of whether he was going to get the first down. None of the Packer linemen are on their feet and the Bengals linebacking crew is converging on him as he reaches them.

[Freak Out]

It wasn't even close with the replays I have seen. How did the Bengal get behind him for fucks sake? What a cluster.

[bobblehead]

Went to the game.

Didn't catch this bit until I watched the replay on DVR.

MM and ARod really went at one another on the sideline. What is the scuttlebutt on this exchange? The plays that were sent in prior to the squabble really did suck. Is our QB-coach relationship unraveling or what?

Tell me what's up all you insiders and local yokels.

I hear that Big Mike had a buffet picked out for after the game and Aaron told him he was too fat and a salad bar was a better choice. Well, Mike is sensitive about his weight, and this led to a heated exchange.

[bobblehead]

it sure as hell looked windy to me. thats what i assumed was screwing with all a-rods long passes

they blamed the botch kick return by ross on the wind knocking it down, and fat mike said after the game that the wind knocked it down but that was no excuse because they were dealing with the wind all pregame

maybe you were just blocked from the wind KY?

My take on that botched kick return is this. Ross should stand on the goal line when the ball is kicked. If he has to back up to catch it, he doesn't return it. If he moves forward or stands still he does. He started at the BACK of the endzone. He had to sprint to get to the ball at the 5. If you play centerfield do you lean against the fence when the pitch is thrown?

If he had been in position that was an easy catch even if the ball gets knocked down by the wind. Part of that is coaching as his positioning should have been corrected weeks ago.

[bobblehead]

This is why I didn't have a problem with the call, just the execution of the call. The big guys were run blocking pretty well all day against a pretty stout D. Unfortunately the guys got beat at the worst possible moment. We really should give Cincy credit here for busting up that play. :sad:

Edit: we didn't have FB. Kuhn didn't play. I suppose we should have put a TE in there instead. :cnf:

Hey Raji...show me what you got, what you got what you got.

[bobblehead]

i liked them going for it because a field goal still opens you up for a loss if they then march down the field and get a TD

i really didn't like the call though, i was expecting a QB sneak or something quick. i really didn't like running a play with what seemed like a very deep hand off when we just needed a couple inches

in the game thread i was calling for Raji to get in the game and either get the ball or lead block

Doh!! I really gotta read ahead before replying.

[Maxie the Taxi]

I think the QB sneaks pretty much ended with Rodgers' concussion in 2010. I don't think they should have run Franklin in there without a lead blocker. Especially an inexperienced rookie.

What are the odds the QB gets concussed on a QB sneak? I think slim and none.

[Fritz]

Well, since it looks like he'd a been stuffed, then mebbe it was a bad call.

[Joemailman]

It wasn't even close with the replays I have seen. How did the Bengal get behind him for fucks sake? What a cluster.

Looks like Michael Johnson knifes between EDS and Sitton to get in the backfield. Quarless is lined up at TE on the left side and is useless. He's outside the point of attack. I wonder if things might have been different if he's been lined up in the backfield as a blocker.

[pbmax]

Yes, he was too high (there are two Bengals thoroughly blocked and in a position to do nothing but collect dust. Franklin is running into the upright ones.

But the other problem with the play is time. He has to hit the hole faster. Johnson should not be able to close that fast. Hit that hole the 3 prone Packers carved out low and drive with knees and feet, but he has to get there earlier.

[red]

Yes, he was too high (there are two Bengals thoroughly blocked and in a position to do nothing but collect dust. Franklin is running into the upright ones.

But the other problem with the play is time. He has to hit the hole faster. Johnson should not be able to close that fast. Hit that hole the 3 prone Packers carved out low and drive with knees and feet, but he has to get there earlier.


thats the problem with the very deep handoff that took place, if it had been a sneak then maybe you don't have the whole defense in there so fast.

but that handoff seemed like it was 5 or 6 yards behind the LOS at least, and it just took way to long to develop

as for pad level. yes, in the picture it looks like theres a nice neat hole for him to shoot through, but thats just because the whole defense is converging on franklin. if franklin would have gone lower, i would guess all the defenders still would have stuffed him

[red]

My take on that botched kick return is this. Ross should stand on the goal line when the ball is kicked. If he has to back up to catch it, he doesn't return it. If he moves forward or stands still he does. He started at the BACK of the endzone. He had to sprint to get to the ball at the 5. If you play centerfield do you lean against the fence when the pitch is thrown?

If he had been in position that was an easy catch even if the ball gets knocked down by the wind. Part of that is coaching as his positioning should have been corrected weeks ago.

i think, he started at or near the goal line, but once the ball was kicked he went deeper, then had to run up on it

it was a massive screw up

[mraynrand]

2010 Packers would have punted and played defense - and won. Maybe the 2013 Packers would have won the same way.

[Maxie the Taxi]

2010 Packers would have punted and played defense - and won. Maybe the 2013 Packers would have won the same way.

Maybe that's the lesson learned. I watched the game film again and, in hindsight, the perfect play would have been a fake to Franklin and a QB keeper around left end. The way the Bengals lined up, stacked in the middle in reaction to the Packers tight run formation, you would expect Rodgers to change the play, keep it on his own and roll out or call time. (On seeing the game video again, I think a QB sneak would have had to have been perfectly executed to work. EDS is no Ken Bowman.) Franklin didn't have a chance given the time it took to hand-off.

[red]

2010 Packers would have punted and played defense - and won. Maybe the 2013 Packers would have won the same way.

i don't think punting was an option, we were at their 30 yard line

47 yard field goal

[Joemailman]

Maybe that's the lesson learned. I watched the game film again and, in hindsight, the perfect play would have been a fake to Franklin and a QB keeper around left end. The way the Bengals lined up, stacked in the middle in reaction to the Packers tight run formation, you would expect Rodgers to change the play, keep it on his own and roll out or call time. (On seeing the game video again, I think a QB sneak would have had to have been perfectly executed to work. EDS is no Ken Bowman.) Franklin didn't have a chance given the time it took to hand-off.

Or...perhaps a more experienced and established RB would have bounced that run outside. The Bengals had totally sold out on stopping the inside run.

[Fritz]

Maybe that's the lesson learned. I watched the game film again and, in hindsight, the perfect play would have been a fake to Franklin and a QB keeper around left end. The way the Bengals lined up, stacked in the middle in reaction to the Packers tight run formation, you would expect Rodgers to change the play, keep it on his own and roll out or call time. (On seeing the game video again, I think a QB sneak would have had to have been perfectly executed to work. EDS is no Ken Bowman.) Franklin didn't have a chance given the time it took to hand-off.

Let me pour some gasoline on a lit match: what if Rodgers didn't change the call at the line cuz he'd gotten into it earlier with MM about the play calling? ("Okay, you fat fuck, you wanna call a shit play, I'll run your shit play.")

[Pugger]

http://i1206.photobucket.com/albums/bb449/route25/ftanklin.jpg (http://s1206.photobucket.com/user/route25/media/ftanklin.jpg.html)

Here's my question about the play. Did Franklin get too high in thee air? he had to get his feet off the ground or he would have been tripping over his own linemen. But should he have been just trying to dive over the backs of the linemen instead of jumping up as high as he did? I know it's become a bit of a humorous cliche around here, but was his pad level too high?

You might be on to something here. When you are up in the air like that it gives defenders a better shot at stripping the ball out of there.

[Pugger]

thats the problem with the very deep handoff that took place, if it had been a sneak then maybe you don't have the whole defense in there so fast.

but that handoff seemed like it was 5 or 6 yards behind the LOS at least, and it just took way to long to develop

as for pad level. yes, in the picture it looks like theres a nice neat hole for him to shoot through, but thats just because the whole defense is converging on franklin. if franklin would have gone lower, i would guess all the defenders still would have stuffed him

There pad level was so low the linemen all ended up on their bellies. :-(

[hoosier]

I believe Franklin was going airborne (instead of diving), so the pads too high argument doesn't work in this case.

[SkinBasket]

I seem to recall the ball came out pretty quick - like before Franklin even had the chance to go high or low or bounce anywhere, so I think it's hard to gauge if he could, or should, have done any of those things. But I could be wrong. I drank a lot after that game.

Anyway, the ball is already half way to the ground in that picture, so Franklin might be upright because he's trying to do... something to find the ball.

[Cheesehead Craig]

Yes, he was too high (there are two Bengals thoroughly blocked and in a position to do nothing but collect dust. Franklin is running into the upright ones.

But the other problem with the play is time. He has to hit the hole faster. Johnson should not be able to close that fast. Hit that hole the 3 prone Packers carved out low and drive with knees and feet, but he has to get there earlier.

Disagree he was too high. Yes, there were 2 Bengals on the ground but the other 4 Bengals there filled the hole wicked fast. He really didn't have any chance by the time he got there, even if he put his head down. He figured the best chance he had was to go vertical and got slammed from the side and the Bengals' helmet knocked the ball loose. If Franklin hadn't started so deep, he would have gotten that first down as he would have hit the hole much more quickly. He starts 2 feet closer to Rodgers and he makes it easy as the initial hole was there.

[hoosier]

In the video clip it looks pretty clear to me that he's trying to go up and over. And if he had tried to go low instead, there were Bengals linemen in both of the A gaps as well as one over center, and all three managed to get lower than Lang, EDS and Sitton, so if Franklin had decided to go low he wasn't going anywhere. In retrospect, maybe MM should have called a stretch play to one side and given Franklin a couple of options to choose from. Or maybe that would have gotten blown up too.


http://www.nfl.com/videos/cincinnati-bengals/0ap2000000249455/Bengals-defense-fumble-recovery

[Maxie the Taxi]

I still don't understand why Rodgers didn't call time, recognizing that Cincy was stacked against the play called. I mean when I watched the video and saw how Cincy was bunched in the box it even scared me and I was watching it on TV three days later! Maybe Fritz is right. Arod and MM in a pissing contest.

[Guiness]

Thanks for the link hoosier.

Watching it, I forgot how early that ball came out. The announcers credited Johnson, but I'm not even sure he didn't just drop it. Watch the slow motion (starting at :44) and in all three views there is no Bengal clearly knocking the ball out. Johnson was the first guy there, if it was him he punched it out quickly.

Franklin definitely tried to go up and over, you can see him launch on his way in. The Bengals totally sold out to that play, 6 guys on the LOS at the snap and two more moving forward at the snap of the ball. The other three were in coverage, I didn't realize the Pack had three WRs on that play, Nelson, Cobb and it looks like JJ at the bottom of the screen. Only with this team is three WRs a running formation!

[Cheesehead Craig]

Thanks for the link hoosier.

Watching it, I forgot how early that ball came out. The announcers credited Johnson, but I'm not even sure he didn't just drop it. Watch the slow motion (starting at :44) and in all three views there is no Bengal clearly knocking the ball out. Johnson was the first guy there, if it was him he punched it out quickly.

Franklin definitely tried to go up and over, you can see him launch on his way in. The Bengals totally sold out to that play, 6 guys on the LOS at the snap and two more moving forward at the snap of the ball. The other three were in coverage, I didn't realize the Pack had three WRs on that play, Nelson, Cobb and it looks like JJ at the bottom of the screen. Only with this team is three WRs a running formation!

It was Johnson. He knocked it out with his helmet.

[Guiness]

It was Johnson. He knocked it out with his helmet.

That helmet must've been a guided stealth missile! Ball looks like it came out at first contact. Franklin really didn't have it well wrapped up considering he was going straight into a stacked line.

[mraynrand]

Just a few observations: Last year the Packers were horrible in short yardage. Horrible. They are a passing team. Their best player is their QB, by far, followed by their receivers. When in doubt, go to your strength. fourth and the game, you keep the ball in Rodger's hands, not the Rookie that was on the bubble, and only got into the game due to injury. Next, who said you had a good power run blocking O-line? Next, if the idea was to fool the defense, and you didn't fool them, why go through with the play (Rodgers sticking it to Stubby - really?). Like most fans I hate the play call because it didn't work. Had it worked, I'm certain I could find all sorts of ways to praise the genius of it.

[3irty1]

Just a few observations: Last year the Packers were horrible in short yardage. Horrible. They are a passing team. Their best player is their QB, by far, followed by their receivers. When in doubt, go to your strength. fourth and the game, you keep the ball in Rodger's hands, not the Rookie that was on the bubble, and only got into the game due to injury. Next, who said you had a good power run blocking O-line? Next, if the idea was to fool the defense, and you didn't fool them, why go through with the play (Rodgers sticking it to Stubby - really?). Like most fans I hate the play call because it didn't work. Had it worked, I'm certain I could find all sorts of ways to praise the genius of it.

To this day I still consider MM's greatest play call to be the play at the end of a 2010 Lions game in Detroit. We're down 3-7, in a toilet bowl of a game. AR is out and Flynn is the QB. It's 4th and 1 or 2 about 30 yards from the go-ahead touchdown. Detroit moves its safeties right to the line of scrimmage. We call a vertical passing play and Flynn lobs it into grass and the Packers lose.

That was the greatest play call IMO because of the message it sent the league. "There is no situation where I will not take what you give me. Last play of the game, back up QB, on the road, playoff consequences... NEVER."

[mraynrand]

To this day I still consider MM's greatest play call to be the play at the end of a 2010 Lions game in Detroit. We're down 3-7, in a toilet bowl of a game. AR is out and Flynn is the QB. It's 4th and 1 or 2 about 30 yards from the go-ahead touchdown. Detroit moves its safeties right to the line of scrimmage. We call a vertical passing play and Flynn lobs it into FieldTurf™ and the Packers lose.

That was the greatest play call IMO because of the message it sent the league. "There is no situation where I will not take what you give me. Last play of the game, back up QB, on the road, playoff consequences... NEVER."

nice. (FIFY)

[Fritz]

Just a few observations: Last year the Packers were horrible in short yardage. Horrible. They are a passing team. Their best player is their QB, by far, followed by their receivers. When in doubt, go to your strength. fourth and the game, you keep the ball in Rodger's hands, not the Rookie that was on the bubble, and only got into the game due to injury. Next, who said you had a good power run blocking O-line? Next, if the idea was to fool the defense, and you didn't fool them, why go through with the play (Rodgers sticking it to Stubby - really?). Like most fans I hate the play call because it didn't work. Had it worked, I'm certain I could find all sorts of ways to praise the genius of it.

Ah, hell, I said I was throwing gasoline on a lit match.

I don't get why Rodgers didn't audible out, then.

[hoosier]

Ah, hell, I said I was throwing gasoline on a lit match.

I don't get why Rodgers didn't audible out, then.

That is where you need a reliable TE who you can count on to get open in the flat and catch the ball after the flanker draws the corner down the field. Chewy was that for Favre in the 90s. I don't think Rodgers has ever had that.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Just a few observations: Last year the Packers were horrible in short yardage. Horrible. They are a passing team. Their best player is their QB, by far, followed by their receivers. When in doubt, go to your strength. fourth and the game, you keep the ball in Rodger's hands, not the Rookie that was on the bubble, and only got into the game due to injury. Next, who said you had a good power run blocking O-line? Next, if the idea was to fool the defense, and you didn't fool them, why go through with the play (Rodgers sticking it to Stubby - really?). Like most fans I hate the play call because it didn't work. Had it worked, I'm certain I could find all sorts of ways to praise the genius of it.

This fan hates that play every time whether it works or not for the very reason that our O-line is not a power run blocking line. When that play works I usually let out a big sigh of relief and yell at the TV that Stubby got lucky.

[Maxie the Taxi]

The more you watch the video the more disgusted you get. The Bengals have 6 guys on the line and the two LB's line up closer to the LOS than Franklin. They actually get to the line of scrimmage before Franklin does. GB's OL gets no push at all. The play is doomed before it starts.

[Joemailman]

The more you watch the video the more disgusted you get. The Bengals have 6 guys on the line and the two LB's line up closer to the LOS than Franklin. They actually get to the line of scrimmage before Franklin does. GB's OL gets no push at all. The play is doomed before it starts.

I pretty much agree that it was doomed from the start. Packers were in a 3 WR + 1 TE set against a defense that sold out to stop the inside run. This was after a challenge, so they had plenty of time to get whatever personnel they want on the field. A head scratcher to be sure.

[Fritz]

The more you watch the video the more disgusted you get. The Bengals have 6 guys on the line and the two LB's line up closer to the LOS than Franklin. They actually get to the line of scrimmage before Franklin does. GB's OL gets no push at all. The play is doomed before it starts.

And so I repeat: if the Bengals' defense is so clearly aligned to stop the run up the middle, why didn't Rodgers audible out of that call?

[Joemailman]

And so I repeat: if the Bengals' defense is so clearly aligned to stop the run up the middle, why didn't Rodgers audible out of that call?

We need Cleft Crusty to interview MM and Rodgers about this.

[red]

The more you watch the video the more disgusted you get. The Bengals have 6 guys on the line and the two LB's line up closer to the LOS than Franklin. They actually get to the line of scrimmage before Franklin does. GB's OL gets no push at all. The play is doomed before it starts.

fat mike once again tried to outsmart the other team, only to once again find out he is the slowest kid in the class

why not call a time out when it was clear they were selling out for the inside handoff? we had time outs correct.

and to answer a question from earlier. no, i do not think he would have gotten the first down if he hadn't fumbled. i haven't watched the replay, but i think i remember him getting stuffed well short, like a yard or two

[packer4life]

http://www.packers.com/media-center/videos/What-You-Mightve-Missed-Bad-timing/97563f00-5b2d-4f8c-82b7-1b02e2cdff4a

Watching this makes me want to vomit. Enjoy!

[pbmax]

3rd Sub Paragraph: Running is better option in short yardage: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/info/fo-basics
-Including 3rd and 4th downs together, running is successful 40% more often.

The Bengals had 5 guys off the LOS, 8 in the tackle box. They needed 18 inches. Should have got it if he is low and doesn't lose the handle.

[Carolina_Packer]

That's two games in a row where a rookie running back dives into a pile and something bad happens; Lacy's concussion and Frankin's fumble. Why jump at all? As far as the 4th and 1, just go low and push the pile as much as you can instead of getting stacked up by leaping. Also, if you needed some road grading and wanted to outsmart the opponent, bring in Raji to lead block. He's done it before. Aren't coaches paid to contingency plan for situations. He already knew he was down to two backs for the game. He didn't even consider Raji for short-yardage situations where you absolutely, positively needed a yard? Come on!

[Pugger]

What exactly did Lacy do that was all that bad against the 'Skins? he was in the process of getting tackled and that goon Meriweather comes in and hits him in the chin with his helmet. He did have a fumble in week 1 tho.

[jdrats]

I don't think either play can be characterized as "diving into the pile" but maybe that's just semantics.

As to Lacy's fumble, there's no way to tell if he would have made the 1st because the ball comes out so early. I think we have a keeper in Bahk, but his wiff allowing the inside to the DE caused Franklin to get hit just as he was beginning his leap over the pile. I suspect that it is a play that they have run well in practice with Franklin as the ball carrier-possibly one of the plays that McCarthy had said he'd drawn up for Harris. The element of surprise comes not from the run call, but from the leap over, which is not something the Packers have shown in recent years.

If Bahk makes the block we might be having a very different conversation.

That said, I'm not a fan of the "leap over" for short yardage--if it's close you end up relying too much on the ref's judgement as to where to spot the ball, and anywhere other than the goal line there is no way that you get a decent, line-of-scrimmage camera angle for a replay challenge. Worse, it plays to the back's instinct to extend the ball out for every inch, and again, away from the goal line, it ends up completely in the ref's judgement as to when the play is dead, and seems like high fumble risk to me.

[Maxie the Taxi]

3rd Sub Paragraph: Running is better option in short yardage: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/info/fo-basics
-Including 3rd and 4th downs together, running is successful 40% more often.

The Bengals had 5 guys off the LOS, 8 in the tackle box. They needed 18 inches. Should have got it if he is low and doesn't lose the handle.

That's the trouble with statistics, pb. Statistics treat every player and team exactly as equals. In fact, "running is successful 40% more often" for the teams with good lines and strong runners. The downside of that statistic (the percentage when running is not successful) is provided by teams like the Packers who have weaker OL's and smaller, inexperienced RB's.

[denverYooper]

3rd Sub Paragraph: Running is better option in short yardage: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/info/fo-basics
-Including 3rd and 4th downs together, running is successful 40% more often.

The Bengals had 5 guys off the LOS, 8 in the tackle box. They needed 18 inches. Should have got it if he is low and doesn't lose the handle.

FWIW. Schatz tweeted after it happened that despite the result, the call was a good one.

[Maxie the Taxi]

FWIW. Schatz tweeted after it happened that despite the result, the call was a good one.

Schatz is a stat guy. All stat guys will think it was a good call. Stubby is a stat guy (except when it comes to the bathroom scale). :grin:

[denverYooper]

I don't think either play can be characterized as "diving into the pile" but maybe that's just semantics.

As to Lacy's fumble, there's no way to tell if he would have made the 1st because the ball comes out so early. I think we have a keeper in Bahk, but his wiff allowing the inside to the DE caused Franklin to get hit just as he was beginning his leap over the pile. I suspect that it is a play that they have run well in practice with Franklin as the ball carrier-possibly one of the plays that McCarthy had said he'd drawn up for Harris. The element of surprise comes not from the run call, but from the leap over, which is not something the Packers have shown in recent years.

If Bahk makes the block we might be having a very different conversation.

That said, I'm not a fan of the "leap over" for short yardage--if it's close you end up relying too much on the ref's judgement as to where to spot the ball, and anywhere other than the goal line there is no way that you get a decent, line-of-scrimmage camera angle for a replay challenge. Worse, it plays to the back's instinct to extend the ball out for every inch, and again, away from the goal line, it ends up completely in the ref's judgement as to when the play is dead, and seems like high fumble risk to me.

Good post.

I mostly agree on Bahk. I think he got schooled by a DE that could very well be a DPOY candidate and had a rough game, but he didn't go in the tank and kept fighting for it out there.

[denverYooper]

Schatz is a stat guy. All stat guys will think it was a good call. Stubby is a stat guy (except when it comes to the bathroom scale). :grin:

Schatz also works for Football Outsiders, the site to which PB linked.

Stubby is a stat guy to an extent, in that he uses it as a tool to analyze his (and the staff's) decision making process. But he doesn't just live and die on the football field by what the stats say.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Schatz also works for Football Outsiders, the site to which PB linked.

Stubby is a stat guy to an extent, in that he uses it as a tool to analyze his (and the staff's) decision making process. But he doesn't just live and die on the football field by what the stats say.

Agreed. I was exaggerating. Seriously, I wish the stat Stubby would become obsessive about is field position. He talks about it alot, but his actions don't seem to back up the talk.

[Upnorth]

I believe FO wrote an article about leaping over the pile leading to more strip fumbles, I hate that play. Arod on short yard situation is like 86% or something. That is the money play imo.

[mraynrand]

That's the trouble with statistics, pb. Statistics treat every player and team exactly as equals. In fact, "running is successful 40% more often" for the teams with good lines and strong runners. The downside of that statistic (the percentage when running is not successful) is provided by teams like the Packers who have weaker OL's and smaller, inexperienced RB's.

statistics are meaningless without context. I'm growing tired of this particular one.

[Maxie the Taxi]

statistics are meaningless without context. I'm growing tired of this particular one.

The odds are 40 to 1 that posters who post the same comment on two different threads are likely to do it a third time.

[mraynrand]

The odds are 40 to 1 that posters who post the same comment on two different threads are likely to do it a third time.

context, Maxi. Bring up another context-free stat in another thread, and i will be compelled to act.

[Upnorth]

The odds are 40 to 1 that posters who post the same comment on two different threads are likely to do it a third time.

Doing the same thing and expecting different results...

[mraynrand]

Doing the same thing and expecting different results...

no no, expecting the same result! Based on previous results - otherwise known as... stats...

[pbmax]

That's the trouble with statistics, pb. Statistics treat every player and team exactly as equals. In fact, "running is successful 40% more often" for the teams with good lines and strong runners. The downside of that statistic (the percentage when running is not successful) is provided by teams like the Packers who have weaker OL's and smaller, inexperienced RB's.

In experienced RB sure. But this line run blocks better than any line in GB since 2007, and it might be better than that one.

[pbmax]

context, Maxi. Bring up another context-free stat in another thread, and i will be compelled to act.

I do wonder why passing suffers in short yardage, I will have to go back and look for the details. Is it because a sig number of passes are panic throws after a blown play? Throwing deep? Do run blocking lineman make the pass rush easier?

[Maxie the Taxi]

Interesting article on the 4th and half yard call when Franklin fumbled:
http://www.espnmilwaukee.com/common/more.php?m=49&post_id=30121


Speaking of the call specifically, McCarthy said he didn’t regret not kicking the field goal or trying a different short-yardage play, such as a quarterback sneak.

“No, it was a solid call,” McCarthy said.

And...


Offensive coordinator Tom Clements said the play does not call for Franklin to try to leap over the pile, which was what the rookie running back was attempting to do when the ball came loose before he got off the ground.

“It’s not a called leap, it just depends how the front plays it,” Clements said. “Usually they try to stay low, (so) that’s usually a good option.”

Asked if he considered having quarterback Aaron Rodgers sneak it, Clements said, “We’ve used them in the past. What we’ve tried to develop are some runs that give you the same benefit as a quarterback sneak with a guy who’s used to running the ball. (Rodgers) is not adverse to QB sneaks.”

I get the feeling if Clements were calling the plays, Rodgers might have sneaked it. It sounds to me like Clements feels Franklin should have gone in low instead of leaping.

Maybe Clements should take the play-calling duties away from Stubby. Apparently, Arod gets along with Clements real well.

[Bossman641]

Interesting article on the 4th and half yard call when Franklin fumbled:
http://www.espnmilwaukee.com/common/more.php?m=49&post_id=30121



And...



I get the feeling if Clements were calling the plays, Rodgers might have sneaked it. It sounds to me like Clements feels Franklin should have gone in low instead of leaping.

Maybe Clements should take the play-calling duties away from Stubby. Apparently, Arod gets along with Clements real well.

I read this a little different. I read it as Clements saying usually they (the DL) try to stay low so Franklin going over the top is a good option. I haven't read the article though.

[pbmax]

Why run it? Because they have been very good at running both normally and short yardage this year. This data includes the Cincy game.

Green Bay short yardage running 2013: 3rd or 4th down runs with first down or TD within two yards of LOS.

Success 80%

Run plays tackled for loss or at LOS 2013:

14%

Overall 2013:


Rank Team Adj. RB Power Power Stuffed Stuffed 2nd 2nd Open Open
Line Yards Success Rank Rank Level Level Field Field
Yards Yards Rank Yards Rank
1 IND 4.69 4.40 56% 19 13% 4 1.36 5 0.42 22

2 HOU 4.58 4.89 33% 27 15% 9 1.56 3 0.89 10

3 GB 4.56 5.46 80% 10 14% 6 1.62 1 1.38 3

[mraynrand]

Look, they cocked it up. Time to move on.

[Freak Out]

Yep.

[pbmax]

Look, they cocked it up. Time to move on.

No doubt. But its inaccurate to compare the qualities (such as they were) of last year's line (or the last couple years) to this year's line. The tackles are completely different (in terms of style, strength and weakness).

[mraynrand]

No doubt. But its inaccurate to compare the qualities (such as they were) of last year's line (or the last couple years) to this year's line. The tackles are completely different (in terms of style, strength and weakness).

noted

[Fritz]

No doubt. But its inaccurate to compare the qualities (such as they were) of last year's line (or the last couple years) to this year's line. The tackles are completely different (in terms of style, strength and weakness).

What's odd so far is that the line seems better at run blocking than previous versions of the o-line. And conventional wisdom suggests that a team that can run decently should be able to pass block better, since it takes the constant pressure to pass block off the line. The defense can't just anticipate pass and pin its ears back - they've got to think run, too.

Yet this o-line can't pass block for shit so far. Ten sacks in three games? A myriad of pressures?

Why might this be so? What happened to "if they could only run better, the pass blocking would be easier" idea?

I see the o-line as the key to the Lions' game. And John Kuhn's health is especially important this week. The Lions' defensive interior is stout, stout, stout. The Pack needs to keep Farley and Suh from caving in the center on every pass play. Kuhn will play a large role in calling protections and helping out, more inside than out, perhaps.

[pbmax]

What's odd so far is that the line seems better at run blocking than previous versions of the o-line. And conventional wisdom suggests that a team that can run decently should be able to pass block better, since it takes the constant pressure to pass block off the line. The defense can't just anticipate pass and pin its ears back - they've got to think run, too.

Yet this o-line can't pass block for shit so far. Ten sacks in three games? A myriad of pressures?

Why might this be so? What happened to "if they could only run better, the pass blocking would be easier" idea?

I see the o-line as the key to the Lions' game. And John Kuhn's health is especially important this week. The Lions' defensive interior is stout, stout, stout. The Pack needs to keep Farley and Suh from caving in the center on every pass play. Kuhn will play a large role in calling protections and helping out, more inside than out, perhaps.

I call this the Derek Loville Effect *.

It SHOULD be easier to run against all the six man boxes the Packers see and this year it finally seems to be happening. That is the O line doing its job.

However, teams are not fearful enough of Lacy/Starks/Franklin/WaiverPickUp to stop using six man boxes versus the Packers 3WR-1TE-1RB personnel. They are still pass rushing like maniacs in most pass or neutral situations. Which is why sometimes, despite known intentions, its foolish to pretend the running game will eventually get them out of that look. Defenses are happy to surrender the yards on the ground. At some point, the O line must protect and Rodgers has to beat a pass D designed to limit him.


*Roughly the time period when Derek Loville looked like an All-Pro back for San Fran because defenses refused to worry about him and instead doubled every SF receiver and attempted to give Steve another concussion on every pass drop.

[Fritz]

Unless, I suppose, the Lacy/Starks/Franklin/waiver guy become so dangerous that they begin converting some 2nd and six's or third and five's?

That is, if the number of yards given up out of a six man front actually begins to result in first downs from longer runs, then teams will start putting another guy down in the box.

Correct?

But if that doesn't happen, Rodgers and company have to beat the six man fronts with passes, anyway - which means better pass blocking is necessary.

Hurry back, John Kuhn?

[pbmax]

Yes. Either easy and often first downs or long runs to get in scoring position (or scores) will change it. But averaging 4.2 ypc won't.



Unless, I suppose, the Lacy/Starks/Franklin/waiver guy become so dangerous that they begin converting some 2nd and six's or third and five's?

That is, if the number of yards given up out of a six man front actually begins to result in first downs from longer runs, then teams will start putting another guy down in the box.

Correct?

But if that doesn't happen, Rodgers and company have to beat the six man fronts with passes, anyway - which means better pass blocking is necessary.

Hurry back, John Kuhn?

[swede]

I call this the Derek Loville Effect *.

It SHOULD be easier to run against all the six man boxes the Packers see and this year it finally seems to be happening. That is the O line doing its job.

However, teams are not fearful enough of Lacy/Starks/Franklin/WaiverPickUp to stop using six man boxes versus the Packers 3WR-1TE-1RB personnel. They are still pass rushing like maniacs in most pass or neutral situations. Which is why sometimes, despite known intentions, its foolish to pretend the running game will eventually get them out of that look. Defenses are happy to surrender the yards on the ground. At some point, the O line must protect and Rodgers has to beat a pass D designed to limit him.


*Roughly the time period when Derek Loville looked like an All-Pro back for San Fran because defenses refused to worry about him and instead doubled every SF receiver and attempted to give Steve another concussion on every pass drop.

This reminds me of when a reporter asked Young about a team planning to attack San Francisco's offense by rushing the quarterback. He answered, to the effect of, "Oh you mean this week they are really REALLY going to try to sack me?"

[Guiness]

Yes. Either easy and often first downs or long runs to get in scoring position (or scores) will change it. But averaging 4.2 ypc won't.

You don't think defenses seeing 3rd and 1 or 2 on a regular basis will convince DCs they need to do something about the running attack?

Maybe. I'm really not sure. I tend to think that down and distance would be a nightmare for them, considering MM and Rodgers wiliness to take shots down the field on that down and distance.

[pbmax]

You don't think defenses seeing 3rd and 1 or 2 on a regular basis will convince DCs they need to do something about the running attack?

Maybe. I'm really not sure. I tend to think that down and distance would be a nightmare for them, considering MM and Rodgers wiliness to take shots down the field on that down and distance.

Yes, if there are easy first downs to be had, they will do something about it. But the Packers haven't scored from long distance on the ground much and my sense is, though I have no data, that their scoring plays still mainly involve one or two big pass plays. In other words, not yet.

[run pMc]

Yes, if there are easy first downs to be had, they will do something about it. But the Packers haven't scored from long distance on the ground much and my sense is, though I have no data, that their scoring plays still mainly involve one or two big pass plays. In other words, not yet.

I think "not yet" is the key phrase here. They've only played 3 games, I think by mid-season -- assuming M3 stays committed to a running game -- DC's will have to adjust. Most defenses aren't as stout as SF's or CIN's. Franklin and Starks have showed burst (ripping off 51 yard and 32 yard runs respectively) and if they can threaten defenses and wear them down -- and a guy like Lacy could really do that when the weather starts to turn bad.

10 sacks in 3 games isn't good, but that's identical to what Drew Brees dealt with after 3 games. I think Bakteria and Barclay will get better in their pass sets, the RB pass pro will improve (esp. if Kuhn comes back) and the offense will be fine. Having a threat of a run game will help Rodgers and the play-action game, but they need to work on those turnovers. They have one less turnover in each of the SF and CIN games and this could be a 3-0 team.

I think if they can field a healthy RB between Lacy and Starks they should be able to convert 4th and inches.