PDA

View Full Version : Odds are against poor running teams



mmmdk
10-04-2007, 10:49 PM
Odds are against poor running teams

Packers undefeated despite meager ground attack

By Tom Pelissero
tpelisse@greenbaypressgazette.com


Nobody formed a cabal to upheave the NFC North’s backfields after last season, but a series of moves in March and April brought fresh legs to all four teams.



The Minnesota Vikings used the seventh overall pick in the NFL draft on Adrian Peterson.


The Detroit Lions sent two-time Pro Bowl cornerback Dre’ Bly to the Denver Broncos in a deal for Tatum Bell.


The Chicago Bears dealt 1,000-yard rusher Thomas Jones to the New York Jets and promoted former first-round pick Cedric Benson.


The Jets sent a second-round draft pick acquired in that deal to the Green Bay Packers, who used it to draft Brandon Jackson after Ahman Green left in free agency.

The results at the season’s quarter pole are mixed. The Vikings are well ahead of last year’s rushing pace, the Bears are well behind, and the Lions and Packers have the NFL’s two worst per-game rushing averages — yet are a combined 7-1.

“They’re passing football teams,” said Chicago coach Lovie Smith, whose team fell to 1-3 with a loss last week at Detroit (3-1) and visits the Packers (4-0) on Sunday. “That’s what they believe in, and as you can see by their records, so far, they’ve been able to win that way.”

How long can they keep it up?

Without indicting the methods behind either team’s hot start, statistics show staying out of the rushing cellar is almost essential to sustaining success through a 16-game season.

The last team to truly buck the theory was the 1986 New England Patriots, who finished 11-5 and made the playoffs despite averaging a league-low 85.8 rushing yards per game. The 1992 Indianapolis Colts missed the playoffs at 9-7 while gaining only 68.9 rushing yards per game, the NFL’s second-worst mark since the 1940s. Only one other team since the 1970 AFL-NFL merger, the Vikings in 1978, has managed a winning record while bringing up the rear in rushing.

So, the Packers’ perfect September is remarkable, even without mentioning they’ve run for an almost unfathomable 54.2 yards per game — 20.3 less than 31st-ranked Detroit, and less than half their 110.5 average the last time they finished last in rushing, in 1975.

The Packers “look more like the old Dan Marino, put ’em in the shotgun, throw the ball around, quick-release kind of guys. In some strange way, (quarterback Brett Favre) has been sharper with this style of play than he’s been when he was throwing it only 20 or 25 times a game,” said former NFL receiver Cris Collinsworth, who joined fellow NBC analyst John Madden on a media conference call Thursday to discuss this week’s nationally televised game.

“Can it last? Can you make a championship run without a running game? I tend to doubt it.”

Per-carry average is an equally, if not more important, statistic, and the Packers are struggling there, as well, with an NFL-worst 2.7 yards per rush. Coach Mike McCarthy would prefer that number be closer to 4 yards in normal downs and distances and in excess of 3 yards in the red zone.

Jackson, who likely will miss his second consecutive game because of a shin strain, leads the Packers with 97 yards on 38 carries, or 2.6 yards per carry. Fellow rookie DeShawn Wynn has a 3.8-yard average largely because of his 38-yard run late in a win over the Giants on Sept. 16. The other two backs, Ryan Grant and Vernand Morency, have seven carries combined.

Yet it’s the defending NFC champion Bears who have fallen on the wrong side of an early power shift within the division, at least in part because their ground game has fallen off. Through four games, Chicago’s averages have plummeted from 119.9 rushing yards last season (15th in the NFL) to 82.8 (27th), and 30 minutes, 56 seconds of possession in 2006 (11th) to 27:18 (29th).

Unlike the Lions — offensive coordinator Mike Martz’s teams haven’t ranked higher than 24th in rushing since 2001, and Detroit is averaging a league-low 19.5 attempts per game — or the Packers, Chicago’s success is dependent largely on its ability to control the clock and protect its mediocre quarterbacks with a steady running game. Failing that, each game falls in the hands of Rex Grossman or Brian Griese, who haven’t proven themselves capable of winning through the air.

“They go hand in hand,” Smith said of the relation between his team’s rushing and passing woes. “We are a running football team, and we haven’t been able to run the football as well as we’d like. That has definitely hurt us, but once teams gang up on the run, you need to be able to hit them with the pass, too.”

The Packers continue to search for a way to do the opposite — open up the ground game when teams key on stopping the pass.

The Packers are passing on 69.3 of their offensive snaps — 178 passing plays to 79 running plays — and McCarthy and Favre have said there needs to be more balance for the Packers to keep winning. Chances are opponents will play more and more press coverage to combat the short passing game, in theory opening opportunities for the Packers’ running backs to take advantage.

History indicates they need to, and Sunday’s matchup with Chicago could be where it starts. The Bears’ defensive line has been depleted by injuries, and after watching Brett Favre post triple-digit passer ratings the past three weeks, it stands to reason Smith will gear his defense toward disrupting the passing game.

Then again, the Packers don’t have intact the 1-2 punch they expected throughout the offseason — Jackson and Morency.

“Certainly, there’s been obstacles to overcome in terms of continuity in the running game,” Packers offensive coordinator Joe Philbin said. “That’s certainly been a little bit of an issue.

“Numbers are important. You want to set reasonable goals. But right now, we just need to play more physically and more fundamentally sound. It’s just that simple.”

There would seem to be little chance the mark for rushing futility would be broken. The 1940 Philadelphia Eagles averaged 27.1 yards per game on a record-low 9/10 of a yard per carry.

But that Eagles team went 1-10. A winning season — much less a championship run — for the Packers or Lions, if they leave their fate up in the air, would be historic.

“You can win games not running,” Madden said, “but you can’t win championships not running.”
Rob Demovsky contributed to this report.

Maxie the Taxi
10-05-2007, 08:51 AM
The reason you can win games but not championships without a running game is because avg. teams have a better running defense than pass defense. Championship teams have good defenses against both the run and the pass, so you can't be one dimensional in playoff games.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, a rushing offense in and of itself is not necessarily effective. Teams have to game plan their offense around their opposnent's defense. See the table below. So far this year the Packers have had a pass-heavy offense because their opponents have had poor pass defenses. The lone exception is against New York, where the Packers passed 38 times but ran 29. The reason they did so is because NY's pass and run defenses are relatively the same.

I don't expect the Packers' run game to be of critical importance until the Denver game. If it doesn't shape up by then, they will lose. NOBODY has any success passing against Denver.

After Denver, the Packers will need a good rushing game in Kansas City and St. Louis (and Dallas). In the rest of the games, a passing attack will do them fine.

However, the playoffs are a different story. GB isn't going to beat Dallas or compete with NE as a one dimensional team.


………………………......NFL Rank…...NFL Rank…...GB's
Scheduled…………..Passing……...Rushing… ...Logical Offensive
Opponent….……….Defense……...Defense… ...Strategy

Philadelphia.........17..................5........ ...PASS (Actual)
New York Giants....14................14...........PASS/RUN (Actual)
San Diego............27................12...........PA SS (Actual)
Minnesota............29..................1........ ...PASS (Actual)
Chicago……………......19................10 …..…….PASS
Washington…………..13.....……………..9 ………....PASS
Denver………………......1….....……… ..31….…………RUN
Kansas City…………...5……......……….19.… ………RUN
Minnesota…………..…29….......………… .1..………….PASS
Carolina……………...…20........……… 21.……………MIX
Detroit……………….....30….....……… .17.……………PASS
Dallas……………........15.....………… ..7….………….PASS
Oakland…………….....18....…………….2 4….……...…RUN/PASS
St. Louis…………….....9…....…………..29 ..…………RUN
Chicago……………......19....……………. 10…………….PASS
Detroit…………......……30…....……… .17…………….PASS

I still haven't given up on the Packers' rushing game because, to be frank, we really haven't needed it so far this season, so we haven't pressed it. Consequently, our OL hasn't had a chance to come together with it. What we have seen in it's limited use so far hasn't been totally bad when all things are considered. All of our backs have had their moments. Grant has good yds/carry. Morency hasn't played. And you can't criticize Wynn's average by taking away his long gainer. That's just stupid. ZBS is designed to open up the long gainer after a series of 1-3 yd. pounds.

Let's wait until the Denver game (although I expect McCarthy to use more runs in the Chicago game to get the OL some reps). If our running game is ineffective against Denver and Kansas City, we will maybe make the playoffs, but our prospects for going deep into the playoffs are nil. Happily, the reverse is true also! Let's keep our fingers crossed.

The Leaper
10-05-2007, 09:23 AM
The good news is that we face a lot of weak secondaries in the NFC, since the AFC has been more aggressive building secondaries to combat Peyton Manning, Carson Palmer and Tom Brady.

A running game's best usefulness to a team like Green Bay will never be to pound the ball. Rather, it's main usefulness will be in time of possession to keep the defense fresh and preserve 4th quarter leads.

Morency's return to the lineup at 100% will be a big help.

woodbuck27
10-05-2007, 09:59 AM
The reason you can win games but not championships without a running game is because avg. teams have a better running defense than pass defense. Championship teams have good defenses against both the run and the pass, so you can't be one dimensional in playoff games.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, a rushing offense in and of itself is not necessarily effective. Teams have to game plan their offense around their opposnent's defense. See the table below. So far this year the Packers have had a pass-heavy offense because their opponents have had poor pass defenses. The lone exception is against New York, where the Packers passed 38 times but ran 29. The reason they did so is because NY's pass and run defenses are relatively the same.

I don't expect the Packers' run game to be of critical importance until the Denver game. If it doesn't shape up by then, they will lose. NOBODY has any success passing against Denver.

After Denver, the Packers will need a good rushing game in Kansas City and St. Louis (and Dallas). In the rest of the games, a passing attack will do them fine.

However, the playoffs are a different story. GB isn't going to beat Dallas or compete with NE as a one dimensional team.


………………………......NFL Rank…...NFL Rank…...GB's
Scheduled…………..Passing……...Rushing… ...Logical Offensive
Opponent….……….Defense……...Defense… ...Strategy

Philadelphia.........17..................5........ ...PASS (Actual)
New York Giants....14................14...........PASS/RUN (Actual)
San Diego............27................12...........PA SS (Actual)
Minnesota............29..................1........ ...PASS (Actual)
Chicago……………......19................10 …..…….PASS
Washington…………..13.....……………..9 ………....PASS
Denver………………......1….....……… ..31….…………RUN
Kansas City…………...5……......……….19.… ………RUN
Minnesota…………..…29….......………… .1..………….PASS
Carolina……………...…20........……… 21.……………MIX
Detroit……………….....30….....……… .17.……………PASS
Dallas……………........15.....………… ..7….………….PASS
Oakland…………….....18....…………….2 4….……...…RUN/PASS
St. Louis…………….....9…....…………..29 ..…………RUN
Chicago……………......19....……………. 10…………….PASS
Detroit…………......……30…....……… .17…………….PASS

I still haven't given up on the Packers' rushing game because, to be frank, we really haven't needed it so far this season, so we haven't pressed it. Consequently, our OL hasn't had a chance to come together with it. What we have seen in it's limited use so far hasn't been totally bad when all things are considered. All of our backs have had their moments. Grant has good yds/carry. Morency hasn't played. And you can't criticize Wynn's average by taking away his long gainer. That's just stupid. ZBS is designed to open up the long gainer after a series of 1-3 yd. pounds.

Let's wait until the Denver game (although I expect McCarthy to use more runs in the Chicago game to get the OL some reps). If our running game is ineffective against Denver and Kansas City, we will maybe make the playoffs, but our prospects for going deep into the playoffs are nil. Happily, the reverse is true also! Let's keep our fingers crossed.

Good effort placed in that post Maxie the Taxi.

Nice job - an excelent illustration of where the running game is needed to dominate our play book selections to deal with matchups.

Thanks. :)

GO PACKERS !

HarveyWallbangers
10-05-2007, 10:32 AM
I agree that the running game needs to do better, but it doesn't have to become upper echelon. New England has won two Super Bowls without a stellar running game. 7 of the top 10 rushing teams last year missed the playoffs--while 5 of the top 7 passing teams made them. If we can get the running game to 90-100 yards/game and the other things continue like they have been (good defense, good special teams, Favre on fire), we can win the NFC.

Harlan Huckleby
10-05-2007, 10:39 AM
I agree that the running game needs to do better, but it doesn't have to become upper echelon. New England has won two Super Bowls without a stellar running game.

the NFL is a passing league, no doubt about it.

I'm glad Jackson is out temporarily just so Grant & Wynn have chance to make strides. Sounds like Morency is going to take several more weeks yet to be full strength.

I don't believe in the running back by committee strategy if it means rotating 4 subpar running backs. I beleive one of those guys has to be capable of making more yardage than the offensive line gives him. I don't see it in Jackson, at least for this season. Jury is still out on other three guys.

retailguy
10-05-2007, 10:50 AM
I agree that the running game needs to do better, but it doesn't have to become upper echelon. New England has won two Super Bowls without a stellar running game. 7 of the top 10 rushing teams last year missed the playoffs--while 5 of the top 7 passing teams made them. If we can get the running game to 90-100 yards/game and the other things continue like they have been (good defense, good special teams, Favre on fire), we can win the NFC.

Agree, but today, the running part of your IF is a seemingly pretty big task. So far, none of the backs appears up to that challenge. We're 32 in the league and need an AVERAGE of 25 yards per game, just to get to 31st. We're the worst by a very large margin.

The true test will come when a defense structures itself to stop the pass and succeeds. At that point, we'd better be able to run. If we can't run then, we're in trouble in that department.

Meanwhile, I'm hoping for a very solid win against an very depleted Bears team. Will be interesting to see what Lovie has in store as his "best" effort to stop this team. I don't expect his odds will be very good at success, but I can't seem him just fielding a base defense... He's got to have something unorthodox planned.

RashanGary
10-05-2007, 10:51 AM
They definitly have to get better. Average will be enough, but they aren't even close to that yet.

Harlan Huckleby
10-05-2007, 11:14 AM
We're the worst by a very large margin.

OK, but of course that is because they are winning with pass alone, I doubt the other stumble-bum teams can say that.

woodbuck27
10-05-2007, 11:19 AM
I agree that the running game needs to do better, but it doesn't have to become upper echelon. New England has won two Super Bowls without a stellar running game. 7 of the top 10 rushing teams last year missed the playoffs--while 5 of the top 7 passing teams made them. If we can get the running game to 90-100 yards/game and the other things continue like they have been (good defense, good special teams, Favre on fire), we can win the NFC.

Harvey ( with the surprizing to me 4-0 start ) we have an excellent shot at the NFC playoffs.

It is now one game at a time and we hope for excellent game plans fr. Packer coaching.

We hope that Favre will continue to execute, and we now are aware that through working with MM and Co. and by his absorbing the load positively that he is excelling.

We had to see a change fr. Brett Favre and he has responded as well as we might hope. He showed us early this year that he wanted more fr. his body with the decision to remove bone spurs fr. his ankle. We now see him taking on a greater leadership role and responsibility in our offense.

Can we advance to and do well in a playoff matchup remains to be seen.

We have to defeat the Bears on Sunday to maintain momentum. Winning that game and defeating the Redskins are distinct possibilities towords going 6-0 to the Bye Week.

Before the seasons opening few people would have even imagined that result was in the stars.

Now that is there as a realistic hope. :)

We have to contend with a feisty Lion offense in that match-up. We have a game with Dallas to use as a valid measure of our true strength.

By the Dallas game we will be looking for our OL, running game and for our defense to tighten up.

We should at least consider the Cowboys as the team to beat overall, but funny things can happen in the NFL in terms of each teams fate with adversity.

1. Overall we have to have good luck and remain healthy throughout the schedule.

3. We must find a running game to defeat the strongest teams (ie Chicago, Denver and Dallas) to assist our effort to the playoffs.

3. Our ST play has to go on improving. Our punt coverage has come a long way to date this season. We sit 5th best in the NFL to date RE: punts after the return, another example of hard work on behalf of the ST coach and Packer players response to coaching.

4. We need to see a stronger run defense then we have seen to date. We need to stop the run more efficiently. That starts with stouter defense on behalf of our DT rotation.

5. We need more on punt returns than Charles Woodson has shown so far in 2007. He is too valuable as a risk of injury to be running back punts. We need him to concentrate on better CB play. To where he was with us in 2006.

6. We need to see our linebackers and defensive lineman work better as a team to cut down on the run productivity of our opposition.

7. We need a more consistent effort fr. the FS position. Safety Atari Bigby is playing very well another positive reponse for us to enjoy .

8. We need to get more fr. CB Charlie Woodson, and hope that Al Harris returns to 100%. Harris is a tough cookie and will get back to what he was the second half of 2006.

This season is defenitely turned to the exciting for all of us that love the pckers.

ALL THINGS ARE POSSIBLE AGAIN.

We need, hope and trust for a lot to go our way. :)

GO PACKERS !

Deputy Nutz
10-05-2007, 11:33 AM
I still ask this question. Why play to the strength of the defense? Look at the 4 teams the Packers have played and all of them are in the top half of the league in run defense including two that are in the top 5 in the league? I understand if the Packers are a run 1st offense but they are not, they don't have the offensive line working in conjunction and not one running back has stood out. So if you have four decent receiving threats and two decent tight ends, your strength at this point is the passing game. No reason to test your pride in a foolish matchup.

RashanGary
10-05-2007, 11:54 AM
Vikings #1 in run defense
Eagles #5
Chargers #12
Giants #14

Average run defense = 8

If we were right in the middle of the pack with our run game, we should rank 24th after playing the teams we played based on the strength of our opponents. We're probably a slightly below average run team, so with our opponents in mind, we'd probably finish closer to 25th or 26th after these four games. Throw in McCarthy taking advantage of weaknesses of their teams and strenghts of ours and you have an excuse for not running the ball yet.

That said, the Bears and Redskins have good rushing defenses. We should do better, but not great against the next two opponents. The Broncos have a horrible rushing defense. If we don't run against them, there is something seriously wrong with our run game that would be very hard to excuse by circumstance like we are doing now.


It's not time to panic, but it is time to worry and start to pay close attn, IMO. I have a hard time believing that our young guys won't show improvement from last year. I'm guessing that we finish somewhere around 18th - 20th in rushing. I think that will be good enough to be the 2nd or 3rd best team in the NFC when you consider the rest of our team.

Freak Out
10-05-2007, 12:13 PM
The Packer RBs should all look like Marcus Allen against the Broncos!

woodbuck27
10-05-2007, 12:27 PM
I still ask this question. Why play to the strength of the defense? Look at the 4 teams the Packers have played and all of them are in the top half of the league in run defense including two that are in the top 5 in the league? I understand if the Packers are a run 1st offense but they are not, they don't have the offensive line working in conjunction and not one running back has stood out. So if you have four decent receiving threats and two decent tight ends, your strength at this point is the passing game. No reason to test your pride in a foolish matchup.

Agreed Nutz.

Yet what we are seeing in our running game is far worse than we anticipated. That has to improve as we get deeper into the schedule. We need much more to fall back on in our running game Vs top teams.

Our defense is not clicking on all cylinders yet as well, and hopefuly that gets stronger. Our D Vs the run is disappointing to me to date.

GO PACK GO !