Our Run Game

[Packnut]

Why does it take coaches, who are assumed to be smarter than we are, longer to realize the simple truth? As an example, most of us here knew KGB could'nt stop the run. We saw how he could never hold the point of attack and was always pushed aside like a rag doll. We saw it, so why did'nt our coaching staff?

Most of us saw Manuel was horrible yet he went into training camp as the starter. Valuable time was lost giving him 1st team reps. Another example of our staff being a tad slow.

Now we come to our run game, or lack of it. Yes we're 4-0 and it has'nt hurt yet, but again just like in the above examples, the great majority of us know it's only a matter of time. Only a fool would believe this problem is gonna get better. The ZBS is a failure. It's a mute point to debate why, it's just time to accept it and move on. Now it would be one thing if this season was a waste and we needed to stick with it in hopes of being better next season. We all know this is'nt the case and with the way Brett and our D is playing, sticking with what does'nt work is foolish and could waste a golden opportunity.

From what we've seen, I think most would agree Wynn is our best back at the moment. His strength is the power run game, so why not simplify our blocking scheme back to man on man and let Winn get 2.5 to 3 ypr? Yes may-be Grant or Morency does have some potential to once in a while break one in our ZBS, but is it worth all the negative plays in order to attain 1 or 2 great runs?

More importantly, my main concern is our failed 3rd and short miscues. We've all seen it before. Offenses who rely on spreading it out and throwing constantly blow 3rd and short 90% of the time. Why not just accept failure and use the simplest method available right now? Favre and our pass game is good enough to carry us so we don't have to worry about running on 1st and 2nd down, but we must be able to run on 3rd and short especially near the goal line. It cost us last year and almost cost us the Charger game. Why wait until it eventually does bite us in the rear?

"Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it". The NFL history says we have to run the ball sooner or later so let's just make the best out of what is a bad situation right now. Return to the power run game that Cliffy and Taush excell in. Coston is a big boy and running behind him in order to pick up a yard or two ani't a bad way to go........

[3irty1]

Why does it take coaches, who are assumed to be smarter than we are, longer to realize the simple truth? As an example, most of us here knew KGB could'nt stop the run. We saw how he could never hold the point of attack and was always pushed aside like a rag doll. We saw it, so why did'nt our coaching staff?

Most of us saw Manuel was horrible yet he went into training camp as the starter. Valuable time was lost giving him 1st team reps. Another example of our staff being a tad slow.

Now we come to our run game, or lack of it. Yes we're 4-0 and it has'nt hurt yet, but again just like in the above examples, the great majority of us know it's only a matter of time. Only a fool would believe this problem is gonna get better. The ZBS is a failure. It's a mute point to debate why, it's just time to accept it and move on. Now it would be one thing if this season was a waste and we needed to stick with it in hopes of being better next season. We all know this is'nt the case and with the way Brett and our D is playing, sticking with what does'nt work is foolish and could waste a golden opportunity.

From what we've seen, I think most would agree Wynn is our best back at the moment. His strength is the power run game, so why not simplify our blocking scheme back to man on man and let Winn get 2.5 to 3 ypr? Yes may-be Grant or Morency does have some potential to once in a while break one in our ZBS, but is it worth all the negative plays in order to attain 1 or 2 great runs?

More importantly, my main concern is our failed 3rd and short miscues. We've all seen it before. Offenses who rely on spreading it out and throwing constantly blow 3rd and short 90% of the time. Why not just accept failure and use the simplest method available right now? Favre and our pass game is good enough to carry us so we don't have to worry about running on 1st and 2nd down, but we must be able to run on 3rd and short especially near the goal line. It cost us last year and almost cost us the Charger game. Why wait until it eventually does bite us in the rear?

"Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it". The NFL history says we have to run the ball sooner or later so let's just make the best out of what is a bad situation right now. Return to the power run game that Cliffy and Taush excell in. Coston is a big boy and running behind him in order to pick up a yard or two ani't a bad way to go........

They have been doing a little bit of power run.

[StPaulPackFan]

Packnut, I am beginning to agree with you on the run game. We drafted a RB that specifically fit the ZBS. Unfortunately, up to this point, Jackson has been ineffective executing in it.

Right now Wynn does look like the most gifted RB on the roster. I believe that if the O-line would get some movement forward, as opposed to trying to create seams, Wynn could get a head of steam going and create yards with his size and quickness. Plus, a smash-mouth O-line would seem to fit the character of this team much better than the "dive and trip" O-line that we currently have.

[Deputy Nutz]

Coston is so weak at the point of attack, even in the passing game. He simply doesn't have the attitude to man up against bigger defensive tackles. No killer instinct in him. Go watch Favre's 421st touchdown pass, Coston gets absolutely blown off the ball and knocked on his ass. Funny. Watch that play and tell me how he can actually help the run game.

I am not about to give up on the zone blocking scheme, but the fact is it sucks right now and I really don't know how to fix the scheme. I thought our linemen were really ready to have a break out season running the football, but they are really back to square one.

I guess you can line up and run a little counter trie but most coaches don't like to shit can there offensive scheme in the middle of the year. Losing Jags as coordinator hurt the running game. Thats the only thing I can think of in regards to the poor play by the offensive line.

Most teams have gone to a viaration of the zone running scheme. Most colleges run it, and even high schools are running it.

Tauscher should excel at it because that is all they ran at wisconsin. Why he is less than average now in 2007 is beyond me.

[retailguy]

If we're committed to the run game, and the ZBS, it is going to take a couple of years to properly implement it. Denver didn't do this over night. Neither did Atlanta. Gibbs was there a couple of years before they led the league in rushing.

I think we were on course to be successfuly but Jags leaving hurt us a bit. I've never seen anyone "master' something in 2 years, which was all the time Jags had to learn. He probably wasn't an "expert" and Philbin could hardly be considered one.

We need, in my opinion, a consultant such as Gibbs (who is still under contract with Atl) I believe, to get this thing going. They just don't seem to be executing the run blocking very well. That has to factor back to coaching at some point, unless the quality of the lineman is questionable. Some don't like Colledge, I think he's a better tackle than guard, but overall like him, and I really disliked Spitz. I haven't been able to watch Coston yet, but haven't heard anyone bitching about him, so he must be OK.

Blaming Jackson might be a bit premature too. He is a rookie after all. This may be just the way it is. Harv could be right, as the DL's we face get less good, our running might improve just based on the lower quality defenses we'll be facing.

We'll see I guess. So far, so good.

[3irty1]

If we're committed to the run game, and the ZBS, it is going to take a couple of years to properly implement it. Denver didn't do this over night. Neither did Atlanta. Gibbs was there a couple of years before they led the league in rushing.

I think we were on course to be successfuly but Jags leaving hurt us a bit. I've never seen anyone "master' something in 2 years, which was all the time Jags had to learn. He probably wasn't an "expert" and Philbin could hardly be considered one.

We need, in my opinion, a consultant such as Gibbs (who is still under contract with Atl) I believe, to get this thing going. They just don't seem to be executing the run blocking very well. That has to factor back to coaching at some point, unless the quality of the lineman is questionable. Some don't like Colledge, I think he's a better tackle than guard, but overall like him, and I really disliked Spitz. I haven't been able to watch Coston yet, but haven't heard anyone bitching about him, so he must be OK.

Blaming Jackson might be a bit premature too. He is a rookie after all. This may be just the way it is. Harv could be right, as the DL's we face get less good, our running might improve just based on the lower quality defenses we'll be facing.

We'll see I guess. So far, so good.

Haha, In my mind Denver is the only team to successfully implement the ZBS. Atlanta led the league in rushing because of Vick. I don't like the ZBS. It works for Denver and it seems like they can turn anyone into a star but our power game turned Gado into a star...

[HarveyWallbangers]

Right now, I'm not a big fan either. It's either too complicated or too hard to practice. We struggled for a good 4 or 5 games early last year, and it's happening again this year (if not worse).

[Freak Out]

The Packers have a run game?

[retailguy]

The Packers have a run game?

Yes. It is called the "short pass".
:wink:

[Zool]

The Packers have a run game?

Yes. It is called the "short pass".
:wink:

I call it 1.5 yards and a could of dust.

[retailguy]

The Packers have a run game?

Yes. It is called the "short pass".
:wink:

I call it 1.5 yards and a could of dust.

Well, the cloud of dust might be stretching it it bit, but can't argue with 1.5 yards.

I still say it's the "short pass". :wink:

[Freak Out]

This kind of success cannot continue with numbers like that. Can it? At some point something has to done whether it be a trade for a RB or going back to basics and run a draw/screen type compliment to the passing game. Not having seen all the games so far I'm curious how many screens have we run? 1.5 per carry! Air M3 here we come!

[retailguy]

This kind of success cannot continue with numbers like that. Can it? At some point something has to done whether it be a trade for a RB or going back to basics and run a draw/screen type compliment to the passing game. Not having seen all the games so far I'm curious how many screens have we run? 1.5 per carry! Air M3 here we come!

some think so, I don't.

If I were chicago, I'd focus on stopping the short pass entirely. Tough? yes, possible? maybe.

if they don't figure it out, someone will.

[RashanGary]

I too am VERY disappointed in this run game. They should have picked up where they left off last year. Instead they started over.

The pass pro is 100X better. I was expecting a similar leap with the run game. It's definitly the biggest disappointment of the year. I'm leaning toward blaming McCarthy and his coaches for not committing to something, anything!

[Zool]

Ok "cloud" of dust might be exaggerating.

1.5 yards and a puff of dust?

[MJZiggy]

This kind of success cannot continue with numbers like that. Can it? At some point something has to done whether it be a trade for a RB or going back to basics and run a draw/screen type compliment to the passing game. Not having seen all the games so far I'm curious how many screens have we run? 1.5 per carry! Air M3 here we come!

some think so, I don't.

If I were chicago, I'd focus on stopping the short pass entirely. Tough? yes, possible? maybe.

if they don't figure it out, someone will.

Don't you think that if they focus on stopping the short pass that Brett will burn them long? We saw him do it last week and if they start trying to stop the long ball and the short pass then that should open up the running game because they're not defending it, don't you think?

[retailguy]

This kind of success cannot continue with numbers like that. Can it? At some point something has to done whether it be a trade for a RB or going back to basics and run a draw/screen type compliment to the passing game. Not having seen all the games so far I'm curious how many screens have we run? 1.5 per carry! Air M3 here we come!

some think so, I don't.

If I were chicago, I'd focus on stopping the short pass entirely. Tough? yes, possible? maybe.

if they don't figure it out, someone will.

Don't you think that if they focus on stopping the short pass that Brett will burn them long? We saw him do it last week and if they start trying to stop the long ball and the short pass then that should open up the running game because they're not defending it, don't you think?

Bretts' strength is not the long ball. He's not that accurate there. But hey, anything is possible. but if we can shut down LT and win, they can shut down the short pass and win, it's the same thing. your best chance comes from stopping your opponents strength.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Chicago and Washington are tough against the run, giving up less than 100 yds. per game, and relatively vulnerable to a passing attack, giving up around 220 yds. per game.

Denver, on the other hand, is tough against the pass, giving up 114 yds. per game and relatively weak against the run, giving up 181 yds. per game (next to last in the NFL).

I don't think McCarthy is going to game plan the rush over the pass until the Denver game. And that game is right after our bye so we'll be able to work on the rushing game for two weeks in practice.

However, as I've said before, passing is easier to simulate on the practice field. ZBS rushing is more dependent on live game experience. McCarthy should have had the first team make more rush attempts in preseason games to work on timing in the ZBS.

Now, he's between a rock and a hard place, needing to get the first team rush attempts in a game, but unable to do it because the teams we've played have been vulnerable to the pass.

What we need is a blowout game in Chicago or Washington, where we get far enough ahead in the first part of the game passing so we can spend the last part of the game running.

If that doesn't happen, we could be in deep trouble when we travel to Denver.

Aware of all this, and barring a blowout against Chicago or Washington, McCarthy may have to do more rushing than he wants to in these next two games. This makes the Chicago and Washington games riskier, but it might be a necessary gamble to take for the sake of the rest of the schedule schedule.

Just my opinion.

[Maxie the Taxi]

An edit to my post above:

I wrote: "This makes the Chicago and Washington games riskier, but it might be a necessary gamble to take for the sake of the rest of the schedule schedule."

That sentence should read: "This makes the Chicago and Washington games riskier, but it might be a necessary gamble to take for the sake of the rest of the regular season and playoff schedules.

:D :D :D

[HarveyWallbangers]

It will get better than 54 rushing yards/game. I hope.

Teams can win without a running game. In fact, it's becoming a lot more common.

New England won in 2003 averaging just 3.4 yards/carry and in 2001 averaging just 3.8 yards/carry.

I think it was also pointed out in a McGinn column that only 2 or 3 of the top 10 rushing teams finished above .500 last year--while 5 of the top 7 passing teams finished above .500.

It's like the old adage that you have to run and stop the run has been turned on it's head. Look at the Vikings. One of the best running teams and one of the best defenses against the run, but they don't win. I think it has to do with the fact that it's hard to score in the redzone with just a running team. The teams that score points (and win) have QBs that can throw redzone TDs.

We don't need to average 150 yards/game. However, like LeRoy Butler said, we'll need to bump our rushing average to 90-100 yards/game to keep winning.

[Rastak]

It will get better than 54 rushing yards/game. I hope.

Teams can win without a running game. In fact, it's becoming a lot more common.

New England won in 2003 averaging just 3.4 yards/carry and in 2001 averaging just 3.8 yards/carry.

I think it was also pointed out in a McGinn column that only 2 or 3 of the top 10 rushing teams finished above .500 last year--while 5 of the top 7 passing teams finished above .500.

It's like the old adage that you have to run and stop the run has been turned on it's head. Look at the Vikings. One of the best running teams and one of the best defenses against the run, but they don't win. I think it has to do with the fact that it's hard to score in the redzone with just a running team. The teams that score points (and win) have QBs that can throw redzone TDs.

We don't need to average 150 yards/game. However, like LeRoy Butler said, we'll need to bump our rushing average to 90-100 yards/game to keep winning.


I think you might need even an average QB for it to work.... :(

[Bretsky]

We're winning w/o a running game and it can't get any worse.

Actually we have a running game; it's called high % passes.

I don't think we can win a Super Bowl w/o a running game; but in the NFC we can be successful if Favre keeps playing at the same level he is now.

[RashanGary]

Maxie,

Good point about Denver. I watched them play Indy and I was amazed at how poor their run defense was. I didn't know if Indy was that good or Denver was that bad. I was thinking we needed to run on them, but then I started thinking that maybe the Colts were just that much better than us and we woudln't be able to do that.

I think you are right though. AFter the bye is going to be our best chance at opening up the run game. I'll be curious to see how we do against Denver. If we suck against them, it does NOT bode well for our SB aspirations. No run game might be too much to overcome in the post season and not running on Denver proves that you really do not have a run game.

[Bretsky]

Maxie,

Good point about Denver. I watched them play Indy and I was amazed at how poor their run defense was. I didn't know if Indy was that good or Denver was that bad. I was thinking we needed to run on them, but then I started thinking that maybe the Colts were just that much better than us and we woudln't be able to do that.

I think you are right though. AFter the bye is going to be our best chance at opening up the run game. I'll be curious to see how we do against Denver. If we suck against them, it does NOT bode well for our SB aspirations. No run game might be too much to overcome in the post season and not running on Denver proves that you really do not have a run game.


If the next two games go as I expect them to that Denver game will be very exciting

[woodbuck27]

The Packers have a run game?

Yes we do and. . .

next game Vs da Bears. . .

we may see two of our running backs (evan) go over the 100 yard mark. . .

for the season.

Exciting !!! :)

Packer Rushing Leaders after 4 games:

..................CAR.... YDS..... AVG ....TD

B.Jackson.... 38...... 97...... 2.6...... 1
D.Wynn....... 23...... 87...... 3.8...... 2

Geeeeee whiz. . . that is almost a 25 yards a game average for these CHAMPS.

For a Green Bay Packer team this is very disconcerting.

It is time to call a ZBS Conference and get this solved.

Various factors are being brought up as to why it has gotten so very bad for our running game:

Is it. . .

1. The loss of a solid and experienced RB that was a leader on and off the field and knew the system better than those selected to remain in our backfield

2. The loss of our Offensive Co-ordinator fr. last season and an inability to compensate that loss

3. The ZBS is realy swell but it takes 3-4-5-6. . . seasons of intensive work in practise and consistent player personnel and coaching to learn and implement the system effectively on game day.

4. The players (tackles Clifton and Tauscher) that we came to know who did very well in the traditional blocking system just cannot seem to get it (ZBS) down

5. an injury nto Spitz

6. Colledge sucks . . no he is really good . .no he sucks . .which is to be determined in the future . . . . when

7. We need more that Scott Wells can offer at Center and he is just too small

8. Junius Costen gets his chance and he is just great. . then he is playing ugly. . see Darren Colledge

9. OR . . .are we simply seeing what some here saw all along since, well see #1 above. Was the potential loss of (slash) loss of. . Ahman Green properly addressed or compensated for. . .

by someone who cannot be mentioned on this forum without the attack squad surfacing and firing up the burning stakes(Question Mark)

Which is it or is it all of the above and I hope not because eventually, this pass happy offense we have. .

a.) Will get countered effectively by the better teams.

b.) A pass happy offense is not going to grind it out and rest our defense over the next 12 games.

SO. . . We all should be very concerned that something happens to fix our running game but of course there will be those that really believe allis well.

Why not take a route suggested by the Samkon Gado intervention. . .

or try something different at the running back position.

Maybe. . . decide who is really the best RB we have and allow him to play.

Gosh. . . it may not be. . . Morency (to some fans surprize).

Are there not any more running back type athletes remaining in the United States or anywhere in the world. . . .

Look at the highlights of Joseph Addai running behind the Colts OL.

He does not pussy foot over the line of scrimage but rather creates his own space by being a superb RB. Is that not what always makes the great RB (Question Mark)

How are Adrian Peterson and Marshawn Lynch looking in their Rookie seasons to date (Question Mark)

I believe we need a better RB (slash) better running backs and maybe someone will just like in the movies walk in off the street and show that he has the real stuff.

I love to dream because being a Packer fan leaves me with just that when it comes to how well we control the clock through running the ball.

GO PACKERS.

[Tarlam!]

Buck, you remind me of my wife. Can't stand her either.

[Merlin]

Like it or not, WB is right. AND our defense is nothing to write home about yet. We have not stopped the run in any game this season. Don't hand me the LT thing because he was gaining yards just fine. The score dictated that SD pass and they did so effectively. MN should never have been within a TD of us, our defense did not play all that well against a very weak offensive team.

Our lack of running game may or may not catch up to us. I think it will but a short controlled passing game (see WCO offense) can and will get you success. The problem is that we aren't even attempting 30-40% of our plays as runs. that's where the WCO makes a difference. Favre's QB rating should be through the roof because this is the type of offense that makes the QB rating soar.

Our running game will continue to stink because our line simply cannot run block.

[Zool]

Don't hand me the LT thing because he was gaining yards just fine. The score dictated that SD pass and they did so effectively.

FIRST QUARTER SDG GNB
TD 07:07 Vincent Jackson 27 Yd Pass From Philip Rivers (Nate Kaeding Kick) 7 0
FG 02:40 Mason Crosby 28 Yd 7 3

SECOND QUARTER SDG GNB
TD 11:53 Donald Driver 5 Yd Pass From Brett Favre (Mason Crosby Kick) 7 10
TD 02:48 Bubba Franks 5 Yd Pass From Brett Favre (Mason Crosby Kick) 7 17
TD 00:32 Craig Davis 9 Yd Pass From Philip Rivers (Nate Kaeding Kick) 14 17

THIRD QUARTER SDG GNB
TD 09:02 Ladainian Tomlinson 21 Yd Pass From Philip Rivers (Nate Kaeding Kick) 21 17

FOURTH QUARTER SDG GNB
TD 02:03 Greg Jennings 57 Yd Pass From Brett Favre (Mason Crosby Kick) 21 24
TD 00:59 Brandon Jackson 1 Yd Run (Mason Crosby Kick) 21 31
FG 00:20 Nate Kaeding 44 Yd 24 31


Other than late in the game when they were down with 2:00 left, when did the score dictate that they pass?

[Zool]

LT's longest run for the day was 11 yards, and it was specifically commented on at the time that "finally he breaks out into the open" by the announcers.


L. Tomlinson 22 62 2.8 0 11
M. Turner 4 12 3.0 0 9
L. Neal 1 0 0.0 0 0
P. Rivers 1 -1 -1.0 0 0
Team 28 73 2.6 0 11


No one on their team was running the ball well. I'm not saying that SD is even decent at running the ball, but geeze dont just throw crap into your posts thats so far inaccurate.

[retailguy]

Look, I've been critical of the packers run game too. Hell, that's probably one thing anyone with a brain can see and agree with. We might not agree on the solution, but we damn well better agree there is a problem.

Tomlinson did not run well. He ran 22 times, that's a fair amount, so it is reasonable to conclude that the Packers did shut him down somewhat. I'll buy that conclusion.

Now, post Philip Rivers stats for the day. He simply carved us up. In a losing effort, notwithstanding, but it was impressive none the less.

Quite honestly, these Packers have played well on D, but seemingly shut down one or the other. So far, they've managed to shut down the right one to win the game, not taking anything away, but don't claim the "D" was great, when Rivers threw for 306 yards and 3tds.

Now, McNabb and the Eagles stunk on both sides of the ball, (as did we on Offense), the Giants Derrick Ward averaged 6yards per carry. Who is Derrick Ward? Exactly. Yet they won, handily.

Adrian Peterson made our Defense look like turnstiles, even if you take out the 50 yard run. Chester Taylor also kicked off a large gain too.

I know, I know, the whole "they bent, but they didn't break". I'm not there. I see it, and we WON, but still, they can't be described as "suffocating", that's for sure.

Harvey is right. The run game has to improve. WB's complaint is valid, like it or not. Yeah, maybe he's a negative jerk, but he's still right. (Love ya Woody... :wink: )

Let's stop debating stupid shit. The D is good, NOT great (yet). The O has come along well the past few weeks, but RB and OL still largely stink.

So, I want to know. What do we do, IF, Lovie Smith finds a way with his depleted defense to shut down the short pass? Do we rely on Favre's long ball, or do we run? If so, with who?

Next - the team is largely one-dimensional right now. It's short pass controlled with the faith in BF. What does McCarthy try first, when Chicago, or our next opponent figures out how to stop the short pass. After all, I believe someone WILL, it's just a matter of time. To those of you who think I'm full of it, I ask the following question - If we can figure out how to shut down LT and WestBrook, why can't some other DC figure out how to shut down the short pass?

[HarveyWallbangers]

Tomlinson did not run well. He ran 22 times, that's a fair amount, so it is reasonable to conclude that the Packers did shut him down somewhat. I'll buy that conclusion.

Now, post Philip Rivers stats for the day. He simply carved us up. In a losing effort, notwithstanding, but it was impressive none the less.

Quite honestly, these Packers have played well on D, but seemingly shut down one or the other. So far, they've managed to shut down the right one to win the game, not taking anything away, but don't claim the "D" was great, when Rivers threw for 306 yards and 3tds.

Now, McNabb and the Eagles stunk on both sides of the ball, (as did we on Offense), the Giants Derrick Ward averaged 6yards per carry. Who is Derrick Ward? Exactly. Yet they won, handily.

That's one way to look at it. I prefer to see that we shut down what the opposing offenses like to do best. We pressured Philly and shut down their passing game and contained Westbrook. We took away the Giants passing game. That's what they do best. Dedrick Ward getting 90 yards wasn't going to kill us. BTW, if you haven't noticed Ward has been pretty damn impressive in his other games also. He looks like a mini-Westbrook. Just because you haven't heard of him doesn't mean he's not a good RB. Against LT, we took away their strength (the running game).


Adrian Peterson made our Defense look like turnstiles, even if you take out the 50 yard run. Chester Taylor also kicked off a large gain too.

I'll grant you that we had some leaks in the Minnesota game. It happens. Our #1 ranked Super Bowl defense was carved up at the Metrodome. However, you take away the 92 yards on those 2 runs and their combined 60 yards on 18 carries doesn't look impressive. Minnesota never really threatened the endzone. The defense did a great job of stopping them once they got to the 30 (which isn't that hard), and they did put on a lot of pressure late in the game.


OL still largely stink.

The pass blocking has been EXCEPTIONAL since the first game. If you didn't notice Philly had 9 sacks against Detroit and Osi Umenyiora had 6 sacks in last week's game. San Diego puts together a great blitz package, and we were able to block them with 5.

There have been many more positives than negatives. How about the pass blocking, the receivers, the TEs, the QB, the special teams, the overall play of the defense. All playing well. I prefer to look at it as if we do get a run block (something we did as the season progressed last year and now we have our best RB back), then we are going to be a tough team to beat.

[Tarlam!]

Yah yah yah. We're terrible. TT fucked up. MM couldn't coach 3rd graders.

Thank God 4 teams are worse than we are. Thank God, we have a better record than 28 other teams.


So far.

[retailguy]

Yah yah yah. We're terrible. TT fucked up. MM couldn't coach 3rd graders.

Thank God 4 teams are worse than we are. Thank God, we have a better record than 28 other teams.


So far.

this is GREAT football discussion. Since you already used your wife, which family member can I be like? :roll:

[Zool]

Couldnt agree more RG, but to drop inaccuracies just to try and further an agenda, I dont like that.


C/ATT YDS AVG TD INT
P. Rivers 27/36 306 8.5 3 1

Rivers CARVED through the secondary throughout the first half. The second half he had success but nothing shocking.



The passing game is carrying the Packers right now. I didnt get to see the Giants game, thank you CBS double header, but from all appearances the D played well. The frustrating thing about the D is they will hold and hold then let up a 30-40 yard run. That has to fall on the LBs and safetys. They are supposed to clean up the runs that get through the line before they become big gains.

The Bears could very well win this weekend, but their weakness is their pass D (321ypg) and that is our strength. That in itself gives me confidence. Its a home game, their D is banged up especially in the secondary and they were just beat by the Lions using the same scheme McM has been running.

I'm far more confident in this game than I am the Denver/KC back to back road games following the bye.

[retailguy]

Tomlinson did not run well. He ran 22 times, that's a fair amount, so it is reasonable to conclude that the Packers did shut him down somewhat. I'll buy that conclusion.

Now, post Philip Rivers stats for the day. He simply carved us up. In a losing effort, notwithstanding, but it was impressive none the less.

Quite honestly, these Packers have played well on D, but seemingly shut down one or the other. So far, they've managed to shut down the right one to win the game, not taking anything away, but don't claim the "D" was great, when Rivers threw for 306 yards and 3tds.

Now, McNabb and the Eagles stunk on both sides of the ball, (as did we on Offense), the Giants Derrick Ward averaged 6yards per carry. Who is Derrick Ward? Exactly. Yet they won, handily.

That's one way to look at it. I prefer to see that we shut down what the opposing offenses like to do best. We pressured Philly and shut down their passing game and contained Westbrook. We took away the Giants passing game. That's what they do best. Dedrick Ward getting 90 yards wasn't going to kill us. BTW, if you haven't noticed Ward has been pretty damn impressive in his other games also. He looks like a mini-Westbrook. Just because you haven't heard of him doesn't mean he's not a good RB. Against LT, we took away their strength (the running game).


Adrian Peterson made our Defense look like turnstiles, even if you take out the 50 yard run. Chester Taylor also kicked off a large gain too.

I'll grant you that we had some leaks in the Minnesota game. It happens. Our #1 ranked Super Bowl defense was carved up at the Metrodome. However, you take away the 92 yards on those 2 runs and their combined 60 yards on 18 carries doesn't look impressive. Minnesota never really threatened the endzone. The defense did a great job of stopping them once they got to the 30 (which isn't that hard), and they did put on a lot of pressure late in the game.


OL still largely stink.

The pass blocking has been EXCEPTIONAL since the first game. If you didn't notice Philly had 9 sacks against Detroit and Osi Umenyiora had 6 sacks in last week's game. San Diego puts together a great blitz package, and we were able to block them with 5.

There have been many more positives than negatives. How about the pass blocking, the receivers, the TEs, the QB, the special teams, the overall play of the defense. All playing well. I prefer to look at it as if we do get a run block (something we did as the season progressed last year and now we have our best RB back), then we are going to be a tough team to beat.

Harvey,

I'm not saying we "stink". I"m saying I see holes. I didn't talk directly about what is good, because that wasn't my point, I was looking at holes, hence my post.

Do you think opposing defenses can shut down what we do very well? And, if they can, what to do about it? I agree about the pass blocking, it has been good, but nothing indicates run blocking will change any time soon. If they take away the short pass, then, we don't really need to pass block, do we?

[Tarlam!]

Get over it RG. We're 4-0 despite my wife and the running game.

[retailguy]

Couldnt agree more RG, but to drop inaccuracies just to try and further an agenda, I dont like that.


C/ATT YDS AVG TD INT
P. Rivers 27/36 306 8.5 3 1

Rivers CARVED through the secondary throughout the first half. The second half he had success but nothing shocking.





I wasn't trying to be "inaccurate". I couldn't watch the game, I was in Tampa at the Bucs/Rams game. I followed the best I could on NFL mobile, but that wasn't a very good substitute.

Considering that the bulk of scoring came in the 2nd half, isn't it reasonable to assume that the passing yardage did also?

From NFL mobile, it seemed as if every time we did something, they marched back down the field. I'll be honest, when 4th and 1 failed, I shut down the phone and enjoyed the rest of the bucs game, then walked 3+ miles back to my hotel room before I "discovered" we won. I don't have DVR so.... I haven't seen the game.

[retailguy]

Get over it RG. We're 4-0 despite my wife and the running game.

Yes SIR! I can see why you are divorced.

[Tarlam!]

Wow, great come back.

[Zool]

Couldnt agree more RG, but to drop inaccuracies just to try and further an agenda, I dont like that.


C/ATT YDS AVG TD INT
P. Rivers 27/36 306 8.5 3 1

Rivers CARVED through the secondary throughout the first half. The second half he had success but nothing shocking.





I wasn't trying to be "inaccurate". I couldn't watch the game, I was in Tampa at the Bucs/Rams game. I followed the best I could on NFL mobile, but that wasn't a very good substitute.

Considering that the bulk of scoring came in the 2nd half, isn't it reasonable to assume that the passing yardage did also?

From NFL mobile, it seemed as if every time we did something, they marched back down the field. I'll be honest, when 4th and 1 failed, I shut down the phone and enjoyed the rest of the bucs game, then walked 3+ miles back to my hotel room before I "discovered" we won. I don't have DVR so.... I haven't seen the game.

I was talking about Merlins post, not yours.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Harvey,

I'm not saying we "stink". I"m saying I see holes. I didn't talk directly about what is good, because that wasn't my point, I was looking at holes, hence my post.

Of course, there are holes. Did you expect us to look like New England has these first four games? We aren't that good. Many people (you included) thought we struggle to be a .500 team. I see a team that clearly looks better than a .500 team right now. I'll enjoy this, as I didn't expect that we'd look this good. The WRs might be even better than I expected. The TEs have bounced back. Run blocking is horrible. That's a surprise. No RB has stepped up--although I have hope for a couple of the guys yet. The pass blocking has been great since game one, and we no longer are helping them with extra blockers. Favre is playing out of his mind. Crosby is the real deal. Tramon Williams actually looks like an NFL returner--which surprises me. The defense is playing well overall. Atari Bigby just might be the answer at S. The coaching looks improved.

I think pride is not letting you see and enjoy these positives.

[Tarlam!]

I think pride is not letting you see and enjoy these positives.

Sounds A LOT like someone I married...... I will say no more.

[retailguy]

Harvey, See, that's where I lose you. I AM enjoying it, I'm looking forward and trying to reason, what happens if this occurs?, or, what can we do, if this happens?

I don't understand HOW they've been able to win so far, it is rare for teams to continue to win without being at least slightly balanced.

I was looking for yours and other insight as to what you "thought" would happen, because I don't have any answers for that.

Zool - I had ignored Merlin's post, I agreed with you. Tomlinson is on my fantasy roster. I know all too well that he STUNK. When I saw 22 rushes in the box, I just laughed, and wished I had Philip Rivers that day.

[HarveyWallbangers]

The number of snide comments you've made about Thompson all offseason and even after these victories is too numerous to post. When people call you out on your opinion, you act like a persecuted, innocent victim.

All week before the San Diego game, you said Green Bay had little chance to beat them. You even made a snide comment to ziggy after she stated that she thought we could contain Tomlinson. After we did win and contained Tomlinson, you mostly whined about was how our run game stunk and how well Rivers did--and said we can't keep it up without a running game. No mention about how wrong you were that we could contain Tomlinson. Little about what a great and unexpected victory it was. Same thing after the Eagles game. Same thing after the Giants game. Same thing after the Vikings game. Now that they are 4-0, you say there are some positives, but you won't judge them at all until the end of the year. How convenient.

Don't be too proud to man up and take responsibility for your opinion.

BTW, is it that hard to figure out how we are winning? We are getting good play from our defense, good play from our special teams, and exceptional play from our QB and receivers (and the OL in pass protection).

[Tarlam!]

()and exceptional play from our QB and receivers (and the OL in pass protection).

Agreed, but not in the Philly game. I know I took it out of context!

[retailguy]

The number of snide comments you've made about Thompson all offseason and even after these victories is too numerous to post. When people call you out on your opinion, you act like a persecuted, innocent victim.

All week before the San Diego game, you said Green Bay had little chance to beat them. You even made a snide comment to ziggy after she stated that she thought we could contain Tomlinson. After we did win and contained Tomlinson, you mostly whined about was how our run game stunk and how well Rivers did--and said we can't keep it up without a running game. No mention about how wrong you were that we could contain Tomlinson. Little about what a great and unexpected victory it was. Same thing after the Eagles game. Same thing after the Giants game. Same thing after the Vikings game. Now that they are 4-0, you say there are some positives, but you won't judge them at all until the end of the year. How convenient.

Don't be too proud to man up and take responsibility for your opinion.

BTW, is it that hard to figure out how we are winning? We are getting good play from our defense, good play from our special teams, and exceptional play from our QB and receivers (and the OL in pass protection).

Ok, now that you have chastised me, do you (A.) want to talk about football, or (B.) are you trying to tell me that you DO NOT want to talk about it.

I've said VERY LITTLE since the start of the season until yesterday, and yes, I did not think this team could beat San Diego. So did thousands of others, yourself included. SO WHAT? I've put up with more snide comments from Ziggy than you'll ever see, so, the fact that I responded is more than just me being an ass, she can hold her own with that "holier than thou" demeanor.

FWIW - I don't really understand how they are winning. The sum of the parts is greater than the individual, because, other than FAVRE, very little stands out to be exceptional. A lot looks solid, so, I guess being a pessimist (whatever), I'm looking at, or trying to, look at what doesn't seem so solid and trying to understand what makes it solid, or at least solid enough to keep winning..

I told you, and everyone else, I'll take responsibility for my views. I'm still here. I could've left, or I could've just banned your ass and talked with someone else... So, when you're done bashing, for some stupid reason still, I'd really like to hear your opinion.

[Zool]

Turnover Ratio is +3 right now, and i believe 3 of the 4 INT's are in the 4th quarter. Play good D, dont turn it over, and keep the game close. Normally teams do it with a pounding running attack, but I'll take the short passing and 1.5 yard runs just to keep the LBs honest.

[packrulz]

The RB's have been nicked up, so I really don't blame the lack of a running game on the ZBS or the OL, injuries are the problem. Wynn is powerful but not that fast, Grant might be able to help out but needs more experience in the ZBS. Philly, the Giants, San Diego, and Minn all had a respectable DL, so I'm not suprised they were tough to run against. The Bears have a tough DL and a banged up secondary, so I expect more of the same and I'm hoping to escape with another win. Jackson and Morency should be good to go after the bye, think how much better the Pack might be, and they're already winning without them. Like Harvey, I'm enjoying the positives, going into the season I thought the Pack could easily be 0-4 or 1-3 right now. The WR's are stepping up, (even though Brett has to chew out James Jones now and then), special teams are playing much better, and the D is becoming a force to be reckoned with. I've noticed how Brett discusses with MM on the sideline, looks at photos of the defense, and talks with his receivers about what's going on in the game. I didn't see much of that when Sherman was the coach, he's more involved because he's allowed to be, he can call audibles and often does like on his record breaking TD pass to Jennings. MM is more focused on what is going on on the field and willing to adapt to win the friggin game, which is all that matters! The running game worries me, but I think it'll come around when our RB's get healthy, after the bye we'll see if they can run the ball.

[cheesner]

Why does it take coaches, who are assumed to be smarter than we are, longer to realize the simple truth? As an example, most of us here knew KGB could'nt stop the run. We saw how he could never hold the point of attack and was always pushed aside like a rag doll. We saw it, so why did'nt our coaching staff?

Most of us saw Manuel was horrible yet he went into training camp as the starter. Valuable time was lost giving him 1st team reps. Another example of our staff being a tad slow.

Now we come to our run game, or lack of it. Yes we're 4-0 and it has'nt hurt yet, but again just like in the above examples, the great majority of us know it's only a matter of time. Only a fool would believe this problem is gonna get better. The ZBS is a failure. It's a mute point to debate why, it's just time to accept it and move on. Now it would be one thing if this season was a waste and we needed to stick with it in hopes of being better next season. We all know this is'nt the case and with the way Brett and our D is playing, sticking with what does'nt work is foolish and could waste a golden opportunity.
How did I miss this thread?

So you are smarter than the Packer coaches. You are much better at spotting football talent. These same coaches/management that signed Barnett and Kampman to extensions, promoted Jenkins and Bigby to starting positions, and felt content with Jennings/Driver/Jones as our WR corp are incompetent. Most of these moves received much objections by the far superior intellectual posters such as yourself at this site.

Perhaps it isn't a matter of football intelligence as it is just plain old intelligence and common sense.

So, you have detected that the Packer run offense leaves much to be desired. I can only imagine the many hours you have dedicated to film study of the first 4 games to come to this conclusion.

Let me ask you this, do the Packers have an opportunity to improve their personnel at this point? Realistically, of course not. Would it be better at this point to rip on your players or publicly give them a vote of confidence?
Common sense would say you make the best of what you have.

[cheesner]

FWIW - I don't really understand how they are winning.
The way I see it is that TT has filled the roster with a lot of young players who have a lot of potential and a lot of desire. This is beginning to translate onto the field. It appears that the team has been very lucky in some of these games, but I am of the belief that you make your own luck. Constantly being in position and playing smart/aggressive football, puts you in a position to take advantage when your opponent makes a mistake.

[Deputy Nutz]

Turnover Ratio is +3 right now, and i believe 3 of the 4 INT's are in the 4th quarter. Play good D, dont turn it over, and keep the game close. Normally teams do it with a pounding running attack, but I'll take the short passing and 1.5 yard runs just to keep the LBs honest.

Turnover ratio!!!! Tough defense in the 4th, yes! Big game changing plays, yes!

You don't have to be perfect or even good in all facets of the game. Sure you need to improve the run game, but when you can complete 70% of your passes against good run stuffing teams your coaching staff is ahead of the game. The Vikings knew the Packers were going to throw all day long, and the Pack were still successful.

[Noodle]

No way the Bears can stop our passing attack if Favre continues as he has with the short stuff. Do folks realize how incredibly destroyed the Bears secondary has been by injuries? They lost both starting CBs and their starting safety. Where would we be if that happened to the Pack?

So I think we can use the same formula, again assuming that Favre stays as sharp as he has.

I worry, like everyone else, about down the road. But the fact is we can't go to a power running game, as we don't have the OL personnel to do it. My hope is that they don't panic and just work like hell in practice on getting their ZBS stuff down.

I also worry a lot about Clifton in the running game. I know his job is to protect Favre's blind side, period, but man he has been brutal. For example, Driver's reverse might have gotten something, but Clifton just whiffed his block down field.

[MJZiggy]

Just a question, but when's the next time we face a good run defense? I'm pretty sure Washington doesn't have one, nor Denver (who apparently can run but not stop the run...). Panthers? Cowboys? Who do we play next that is good at stopping the run?

[HarveyWallbangers]

The Bears--when they have Tommie Harris.

[MJZiggy]

The Bears--when they have Tommie Harris.

But he's not playing this week, right? So who's next up beyond them?

[run pMc]

EVERY team (well, except for NE) has holes.

I agree GB's running game has problems. I think the OL is not playing consistent and that happens when you have young players.

I hope GB gets the run game going soon. Favre is a freak of nature, but at his age his arm might fall off if he has to throw 45 times a game all season.
(Knock on wood that he doesn't develop tendinitis in the elbow.)

Getting Morency back in the lineup might help, and the young guys have shown flashes. The coaches will get these guys straightened out. Hey, we could be talking about Herron right now if he wasn't on IR.

[TheRaven]

I could've left, or I could've just banned your ass and talked with someone else

Wow, you didn't abuse your mod position. Congrads.

[HarveyWallbangers]

The Bears--when they have Tommie Harris.

But he's not playing this week, right? So who's next up beyond them?

He played last week, and McGinn said in his column that he should be back to full strength this week.

[RIPackerFan]

Just looking at the notes from the Bears practise - it looks like Briggs did more harm than good by playing last week - can't even sprint:

http://blogs.chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/huddleup/2007/10/tillman-briggs-.html


Sorry Bears fans. Your team is still banged up.

Charles Tillman (ankle) and Lance Briggs (hamstring) ran sprints on the side while the rest of the team practiced Tuesday. And neither player looked great running, although Tillman was a little more fluid with his motion than Briggs.

Nathan Vasher (groin) continues to sit out practice, but the surprise addition to the no-practice list was safety Brandon McGowan. It's unclear when McGowan got hurt, but he played a lot against Detroit this past weekend. The Bears already lost two safeties for the season in Mike Brown (ACL) and Kevin Payne (broken arm), and a third -- Adam Archuleta -- is practicing with a broken right hand.

Tommie Harris (knee) was on the practice field but his participation was limited through the first 15 minutes.