"Run Game Never Hits Ground"

[Bretsky]

Run game never hits the ground
McCarthy largely abandons trying to use ineffective rush
By BOB McGINN
bmcginn@journalsentinel.com
Posted: Oct. 14, 2007

Actions spoke louder than words Sunday afternoon when it came to Mike McCarthy's regard for the Green Bay Packers' ground game.
Dared to run by a Washington Redskins defense that lined up its safeties as deep as 22 yards all day long, McCarthy almost didn't even try in his team's 17-14 victory at Lambeau Field.

Nine times in the first half the Packers encountered first and 10 in non-hurry situations. Eight times they tried to pass. On the one time that they did run, DeShawn Wynn gained 1 on a draw play.

For the day, the Packers rushed 20 times for 56 yards (2.8 yards per carry), just about par for the course for a team now averaging 65.7 per game and 3.26 per carry.

"You guys probably get tired of hearing me say this but running the football is about attitude and fundamentals," McCarthy said. "We need to improve both."

McCarthy came out winging it on the first four plays from scrimmage and never really stopped until the middle of the fourth quarter.

Protecting a three-point lead, the Packers did manage one first down rushing before a 2-yard gain by Vernand Morency prompted McCarthy to call a pass, which was intercepted.

Given another chance with just less than 3 minutes left, Wynn went minus-2, 5 and no gain on three straight carries and the Packers gave the Redskins another chance.

"How can you not be (worried)?" Brett Favre said. "We needed to run the ball and run the clock out at the end. We needed to do that in several situations this year.

"We need to force people out of Cover 2. They're playing Cover 2, which is so difficult to throw against."

Some of the Redskins' defenders seemed amazed that McCarthy didn't attack their seven-man fronts.

"It's hard to believe they didn't try a little bit more," said defensive end Phillip Daniels, who, as a member of the Chicago Bears from 2000-'03, had to deal with Ahman Green. "I'm not used to them like that. I'm used to them running the ball."

Ditto for linebacker Randall Godfrey, who made his 146th start.

"I thought (McCarthy) was a little more balanced than what he's been doing," Godfrey said. "We were trying to make sure they didn't pass all over the field on us like they've done in the past. I think Wynn is going to be a pretty good back. They've just got to be more balanced."

Through six games, the Packers have run on 31.9% of their plays. For a full season, the team's low for running the ball was 36.7% in 1990. That's when Michael Haddix led coach Lindy Infante's third club in rushing with 311 yards and a 3.2 mark.

Wynn is on pace for 539 yards.

"But No. 4 (Favre) is going to make plays, you know?" Godfrey said. "I'm thinking New England. I've seen them pass every down."

A few times, safety LaRon Landry would creep down near the line of scrimmage and Favre would throw a slant into the area the rookie vacated.

"Right now, we know that's the running play for them," said Gregg Williams, the Redskins' assistant head coach-defense. "Possibly the numbers get skewed and Mike takes heat because he's not running enough, but he calls a run and Brett sees they don't have the numbers right and he puts the ball in the receiver's hands. Going into this breakdown, he's done that 15 to 18 times where they had runs called and he (passed).

"Brett just pops up and throws the slant when everybody else is run blocking. We know that's their 'nod' game, that's their slant game. We did a good job tonight most times not letting him have his first read."

Veteran linebacker London Fletcher, 32, goes back to the days when Dorsey Levens was behind Favre.
"Those quick slants and stuff like that, those are like handoffs," Fletcher said. "You look at the stat sheet and see they don't have many rushes, but think about when they have called runs and they throw the quick slants. And they're getting more yards than they would have if they had tried to run.

"No. 4, put it in his hands. Right now, they're playing to their strengths."

How long can the Packers survive without a ground attack?

"Like every team, you like to have balance and all that," veteran guard Pete Kendall said. "But the fact of the matter is, they're doing enough offensively to complement that defense, which has been playing at a very high level."

Whatever McCarthy does is fine with Morency.

"We're winning," he said. "What are you going to do? Sacrifice the No. 1 passing game to satisfy critics and people like that? Granted, I want the ball. We all want the ball. But you've got to go with what's working."

And right now, that certainly isn't the run game.

[Bretsky]

I think MM did a fine job Sunday; if you know you can't run it's better to admit it then continuously try it and fail.

If Favre makes a couple deep throws he should make Sunday all is well.

Regardless a win is a win

[The Leaper]

I think MM did a fine job Sunday; if you know you can't run it's better to admit it then continuously try it and fail.

I would agree for the most part. What bothered me was that he did not really seem to even try to see if running would work. Washington was DARING us to run. At that point, you should at least give it a couple chances to see what happens. To have only 1 rush on first down (especially when it is a draw) seems to me like never giving the running game a chance at all...and I do disagree with that.

If you try it, and it isn't working...great, throw the ball 50 times. If you never even try it at all when the other team is focused on coverage? You need to be able to make proper in game adjustments to that.

[LL2]

M3 does need to give the run game more of an effort, even if you don't have a lot of faith in it. I would have to think that if he gave it more of an effort the ground game would get in gear and take off. I don't think the Pack needs to have a great running game to go deep into the playoffs but good enough to keep defense suspect and not always expect the pass.

[Joemailman]

Many are wondering when the lack of a running game will catch up with the Packers. In terms of offensive production, perhaps it already has. Over the last 6 quarters, the Packer offense has produced 13 points. Teams are now daring the Packers to run the ball. It will be very difficult for the Packers to throw the ball down the field as long as teams are playing their safeties deep. I'm not suggesting all doom and gloom here. The combination of Favre and this defense will make the Packers competitive in just about every game. However, for this team to get better, they will have to develop a running threat.

[Ballboy]

I think the real problem is MM not really giving the run game a chance. When Brett gets to the line and the LB's are 7+ yards off the line, we should be running. The attempts are just not there.

I like Wynn, I think he could be a decent back. He may not break the big one, but 4-6 yards isn't a reach.


On a side note, the run play the Packers seemed to run alot is a stretch play to the right behind Moll & Tausch.......this is a slllllooooowwww developing play, which against a fast defense like Redskins gets caught.....what about the quick hits between guard & center?

[run pMc]

I agree..it seems like some of the plays are really slow to develop, and it can be hard to sustain blocks for that long. I'd like to see more quick hitters up the middle by Wynn...he's a big guy at 230lbs. Seemed like we had some success with that early against CHI. If other teams are playing the cover 2, why not try that again?

I don't think you can try 1 or 2 runs and then abandon it for the pass. (OK, so that's probably not what other posters meant, but still...) Favre is very good, but he's still a gambler...I'd rather him have 28-35 attempts than 40-50...he's likely to pull a bonehead play, and a running game eats the clock and rests GB's D. Teams are going to play their corners inside and jam at the line with a cover 2 shell to disrupt the passing game...especially those slants. GB needs to develop that running game (and fast) to make teams pay for playing their LBs and safeties deep.

[3irty1]

This is the first time all season I'm going to care about the run. We have a bye week to work on this stuff and when we come back we play Denver. This is the worst run defense and the best pass defense we've played. We have GOT to run it here.

[The Leaper]

The Packers need to take more advantage of getting receivers in motion at the snap to avoid jams and use more creative routes (crossing patterns, outs) to counter the defenses tendency to look for slants. On Favre's one INT, that is precisely why it was open when Favre pump faked...the defenses are SITTING on the slants now, so the offense has to be able to take advantage of that with double moves and creative routes from slot receivers/TEs.

What I don't like is passing, passing, passing...but not putting Favre in the shotgun most of the time to do it. If you are going to basically give up on the ground game, then at least put Favre in the most advantageous position to pick apart the defense. Forget play action...IT AIN'T GONNA WORK right now. Pump fakes will work much better than play action right now.

[Merlin]

The defenses are keying the slants but we aren't running them either. Maybe that's why MM has resorted to the fakes. I know that in many situations Favre could have gone to the slant yesterday, especially when the LB's were coming but he didn't. Maybe MM took some control away from Favre? The offense looks like the Hyde has shown up.

[Carolina_Packer]

If their safeties were always so deep, where was our middle of the cover 2 passing game? We hit one with Donald Lee and then we seemed to quit trying to make the safeties come up and cover the middle. Why not try and go back to Lee? He seems to have some athleticism. Bubba's hands are mixed. Sometimes he has stone hands, but on that obvious push out where he caught the ball, it was an amazing play. I can't believe we didn't challenge that no call. I wonder what McCarthy and staff was thinking when their people saw the replay. I was yelling challenge, and they went to commercial and I was half expecting them to have thrown the challenge flag by the time the game came back on. Never materialized.

I went out to find something about challenges; when you can and can't. This was intereresting, but definitely not super-enlightening. Anyone else have a link to some good info on when you can/can't challenge?

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/364313/understanding_nfl_football_challenges.html?all=1

[The Leaper]

Sometimes he has stone hands, but on that obvious push out where he caught the ball, it was an amazing play. I can't believe we didn't challenge that no call.

You can't challenge that call. It was a judgment call that can't be reviewed. Personally, I hate that rule. I think you should have to get both feet down regardless. Leaving it up to the ref's "discretion" is a bad idea IMO.

I would've thrown the red flag simply to have the refs come over so that I could publically ream them in front of 70,000 people for that AND the lame holding penalties that previously had cost the Packers a TD...when the Packer DL was getting held and tackled all day with few flags.

[Merlin]

There was no doubt in my mind that Franks had the TD. I don't know why it can't be reviewed. It can be reviewed if the official doesn't call it a TD with a push out or calls it a non-catch. Once he says he wouldn't have caught it in bounds then it's a dead issue. It was a horrible call and a great catch by Franks. I thought MM called a timeout after that play for that reason?

[Freak Out]

I'd say the running game never hit the ground! Morency just does not have it yet...he may never or he may still be feeling the effect of one of his numerous injuries and that is why he looks so hesitant in some situations. Wynn looks better and looks to have no fear but some of the plays that are called are doomed from the start....its like MM thinks we have LT back there. What the hell kind of a scheme are they trying to run anyway? The ZBS scheme that I want to see is the one that beat us in the fucking SB! Ya ya...I know...... we don't have TD.

A few timely drops and the D coming up big won us the game yesterday...even a hint of a running game will make it easier.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Morency hasn't been that bad--especially in the passing game. He had a couple of cuts he missed in this game. Wynn is such a plodder. He reminds me of Najeh. He's got some power and some speed, but he isn't good when he has to try to cut in the backfield. He's good when he gets a head of steam. Wynn is a good pass protector, but he has terrible hands, so it's kind of catch-22 to have him in on passing plays.

[Harlan Huckleby]

we can start grading Morency after the bye week, he will be as healthy as he's going to be then.

[pack4to84]

the thing i don't like about Morency is he seems to go down too easy. On a few of his runs he got 3 yards and went down with minimal contact. I was upset he had a hole for a change and went down with a bump not even arm contact just a bump from a DL.

[Harlan Huckleby]

the thing i don't like about Morency is he seems to go down too easy.

ya, he's a third down back. Same as Jackson.

It will be interesting to see whether Jackson can pass-up Morency on the depth chart next year. Players often make a big jump after their first year, but nothing is for certain.

[RashanGary]

In any order:

Coaching instability with losing Jags and maybe not replacing him adiquately

Players who are more finesse than nasty

RB's who are below average


It all comes together to equal the worste running team in the NFL.

[LEWCWA]

I really don't think McCarthy gave this team a chance to run the ball yesterday. You don't have to force the run, but damn you gotta call more than 12 or 13 run plays. I'm not counting the run plays at the end of the game, as they were clock management calls!

[Carolina_Packer]

I really don't think McCarthy gave this team a chance to run the ball yesterday. You don't have to force the run, but damn you gotta call more than 12 or 13 run plays. I'm not counting the run plays at the end of the game, as they were clock management calls!

Combine this comment with JH's comment about nastiness (can we extrapolate and say toughness?), I think DeShawn Wynn can become that. We're just in a hurry for him to grow up. Not fair to him, he's learning as fast as he can. Still, I put this predicament on TT for not trying to get some kind of veteran stop-gap measure at RB, even if our current crop of RB's out-performed whoever they brought in, that's the hope anyway. If not, at least you have a guy who can help get the job done in the short term. We are asking a lot of the relative level of experience we have, and the stature of our current backs like Morency and Jackson.

[Bossman641]

I really don't think McCarthy gave this team a chance to run the ball yesterday. You don't have to force the run, but damn you gotta call more than 12 or 13 run plays. I'm not counting the run plays at the end of the game, as they were clock management calls!

Agreed.

When the other team sits their safeties 20 yards off the line and you come out passing on 8 outta 9 first down plays the RB's are never really given a chance. It's one thing to be stubborn with the run, it's another thing to not even try.

IMO, MM gives up on the run way too early. Unless there is early success (CHI game) the running game becomes an afterthought. I'm not saying we need to bang our heads against a brick wall trying to run, but there needs to be more first down runs. The big pass to Lee came off play action on first down. We need more first down runs to set those up.

[RashanGary]

I really don't think McCarthy gave this team a chance to run the ball yesterday. You don't have to force the run, but damn you gotta call more than 12 or 13 run plays. I'm not counting the run plays at the end of the game, as they were clock management calls!

Guess what? They suck at running the ball. If he had called more, he would have failed and there would be a huge thread about MM banging his head against the wall with something that doesn't work.

They really are that bad. It's not just not calling enough plays. It's a complete failure and MM Doing what he has to do in spite of it.

[Partial]

Collins I think you are jumping the gun. I don't think they're as bad as you think.

[Bretsky]

I really don't think McCarthy gave this team a chance to run the ball yesterday. You don't have to force the run, but damn you gotta call more than 12 or 13 run plays. I'm not counting the run plays at the end of the game, as they were clock management calls!

Guess what? They suck at running the ball. If he had called more, he would have failed and there would be a huge thread about MM banging his head against the wall with something that doesn't work.

They really are that bad. It's not just not calling enough plays. It's a complete failure and MM Doing what he has to do in spite of it.


Exactly. We suck at running the ball. It takes a strong coach to game plan around that and MM is that. Passing, good specials, and a strong defense. That is how we will win games.

I use to think Minnesota running game was quite strong because people game played around Moss. Even if GB had signed Moss, I still don't think our running game would be competent. Minnesota at least had Robert Smith at the time.

Our OL is weak at the points of attack. The young guys are not strong enough to get a push, and the older veterans strengths do not conincide with the type of offense we are running.

And IMO we still don't have a RB who can carry the load on our roster.

[Bretsky]

Collins I think you are jumping the gun. I don't think they're as bad as you think.


I'd like to point out that I completely agree with Justin Harrell :shock: :lol:

[b bulldog]

How can anyone not agree with the obvious

[Partial]

I think it will continue to be serviceable by virtue of the passing game being good. By keeping people back to cover the receivers, it will open up the running game. Now the question is will MM run the ball often? The key is commitment.

[Joemailman]

What will happen at Denver? Denver has the #32 run defense, giving up 187 YPG, and 5.2 YPC. Packers have the #32 rushing offense, averaging 67 YPG and 3.3 YPC. Should be a classic struggle.

[4and12to12and4]

I cannot believe we are second guessing MM's playcalling. I am estatic that we have a coach that isn't stubborn running the ball every 1st down (like Sherman) and I love that he does mix it up enough that I can never say for sure what play is coming. I swear, every time I think they are gonna run they pass and many times I figure they are for sure gonna pass, he'll sneak a run in there. The key to this offense is getting 5 to 7 yards on 1st down so that we can either run or pass on second down. We are good enough to do that against most teams with the pass game. It just so happens, we've played the Eagles, Chargers, Bears, and Redskins. Give me a break. The fact that we even won 3 of those 4 games is a miracle and is BECAUSE MM is smart enough to use the strengths we have on offense. If he would've been more conventional and ran 35 times, we would be 1-5 right now. His innovative playcalling is why we have a winning team. My god, people, we had a make-shift offensive line yesterday, as if it wasn't bad enough with Wells and Coston in there. This line still hasn't figured out this damn scheme we're running, and I'm starting to wonder if we should switch back to a more conventional scheme. Maybe our guys just aren't fit for it. I know our tackles who used to be so good have been less than average in the run since this system has been put in place. But to try to run yesterday with Morency just back still not 100%, and a rookie as your other back, and a backup center and guard, give me a break. MM isn't an idiot. We would have failed. Yes, we went 1,2,3, out at least 6 times anyways, so looking back we might as well tried it, but, if not for officiating, we win this game 31-14.

I look at us kind of like Indy last year. Everyone said they couldn't win the Superbowl because they couldn't stop the run. Then, when the playoffs started, they stopped the run and their defense came together with an attitude and did it. So, get our o-line and rb's healthy and by the end of the year, we could get this ONE issue taken care of. If we do, we will truly be a team to be reckoned with. But for now, Jackson was just getting his feet wet and he got injured, Morency hasn't been healthy, and now Wells and Coston are injured. Guess what? MM is still playcalling winning games, and if our RB's get healthy and get some games in with the SAME o-line in there, we should start running much better. The good thing is this. If we end up in the playoffs against a team that has a great run defense, at least we are gaining experience in how to win without the run. This could actually be a good thing.

[the_idle_threat]

What will happen at Denver? Denver has the #32 run defense, giving up 187 YPG, and 5.2 YPC. Packers have the #32 rushing offense, averaging 67 YPG and 3.3 YPC. Should be a classic struggle.

It's the classic "stoppable force vs. movable object." Something has to give!

[Rastak]

What will happen at Denver? Denver has the #32 run defense, giving up 187 YPG, and 5.2 YPC. Packers have the #32 rushing offense, averaging 67 YPG and 3.3 YPC. Should be a classic struggle.

It's the classic "stoppable force vs. movable object." Something has to give!


Classic....I was thinking the same thing but couldn't find the words like you did.....

[RashanGary]

I hate to be a blind optimist, but I think a part of our problem is coachable. The finess Olineman and the below average RB's are not going away this year. However, the blocking can get better.

I just want to go from dead last to somewhere on the low end of average based on improved blocking.


As far as our RB's are concerned, we don't have one who is strong enough and explosive enough to really carry the load. Wynn is strong enough, but he lacks suddeness to the hole. Jackson is lost and Morency goes down way too easy. Grant has not impressed in any way.

Short term, the best we can hope for is just below average.

Long term, Jackson can become a prototypical 3rd down back with the skills to attack the perimeter with tosses and short passes. Wynn has everything you want in a RB, including excellent instincts. However, he's lacking an explosion that a good year of training and conditioning can cure. At one point, when I was at my peak of exercising (30 mins per day :), I'm lazy), I was focusing on explosion exercises where I would do squats, but leap with as much explosion as possible. I would also use weights and explode again. When I played sports, I was suprised at how quick and powerfull I was. I never went nuts on weights, but it's amazing how much your body can do if you push it. Anyway, Wynn seems like a guy who's just scratching the surface of what his body can do. He looks like a running back, but his body just isn't there yet. Long term, he might be the answer.


As far as this year goes, it's just hope and pray because anything short of an act of god or perfect coaching isn't going to get this cruddy run game on track unless below average is on track and even that is a long shot right now.

[Bretsky]

I think it will continue to be serviceable by virtue of the passing game being good. By keeping people back to cover the receivers, it will open up the running game. Now the question is will MM run the ball often? The key is commitment.


Continue ? I don't think it's been serviceable. If we had serviceable we'd have been able to run against Da Bears when they dared us to in the second half

[Harlan Huckleby]

Wynn is strong enough, but he lacks suddeness to the hole. Jackson is lost and Morency goes down way too easy. Grant has not impressed in any way.

:lol: Sounds like the four weak sisters.


Wynn has everything you want in a RB, including excellent instincts. However, he's lacking an explosion that a good year of training and conditioning can cure.

I don't quite see this, he looks explosive to me, just not real fast.

I think the best offseason work for the Packers would be for Wynn and Collins to play catch on the beach.


He looks like a running back, but his body just isn't there yet. Long term, he might be the answer.

I think he's already there, or at least not far off, as a runner. He's going to be good enough to be a starter, but not a special back. Another Davenport, as somebody else mentioned.

Speaking of runners: I think an under-reported factor in Adrian PEterson's success is the superiority of the Vikings offensive line. I don't think he would be nearly so successful on the Packers.

[superfan]

Good running teams have success by establishing a rhythm as the game progresses. The Ahman Green teams were frequently able to find their rhythm. This team, as it stands now, is 0 for 6 in this area.

There are many factors that go into a successful running attack - a good RB, solid run blocking, effective scheme, inspired play calling, the threat of a passing game. Not to mention the competency of the opposing run defense. If you can be successful with 3 or 4 of these factors, you can be effective. The problem is that we have failed in all areas at various points of the season.

If GB can play a complete game in the other facets of the offense, they can still have a good ground attack despite lacking an elite, or even good, RB.

[GrnBay007]

Good running teams have success by establishing a rhythm as the game progresses. The Ahman Green teams were frequently able to find their rhythm.

I was watching 2003 highlights tonight. Man I miss watching someone like Ahman run the ball the way he did.

[superfan]

I was watching 2003 highlights tonight. Man I miss watching someone like Ahman run the ball the way he did.

I was, and remain, a big Ahman fan, but I'm not convinced the 2007 version of Batman would be much more successful this season than what we currently have, even if he was healthy. I would expect the running game to be better, but still below average. I blame the line first, lack of commitment to the running game, second.

Regardless, best case scenario is that if we still had Ahman we might have one less loss than we have now. Not that big of a difference - yet.

[vince]

I just checked the up-to-date rushing statistics, and was surprised to find out that the Packers (3.3) are now better than the Chicago Bears (3.2), Houston Texans (3.1), and the Kansas City Chiefs (3.1) in Rushing Yards per Attempt.

Not that it's anything to brag about...