Offensive Identity......

[RashanGary]

I know everyone likes to blame Mike Sherman for everything from 4th and 26 to the 70's outbreak of genital herpes but one thing is for certain, he coached up one of the most dominating offenses in Packers history.

Last season aside, the Greenbay Packers have definitly had an offensive identity. That identity was the Mike Sherman assmebled power run game. The staple was Rivera and Tauscher road grating the right side with Wahle pulling and knocking the first trembling defender on his ass. Ahman Green in his prime would hit a crease and take it 60 yards seemingly every game. He did it pretty consistantly to the tune of almost 1,900 yards in one season and more rushing yards than any other back in the NFL from 1999-2004.

From there, the offense would adjust and take what was given. Walker streched the field and made defenses pay for forgetting to cover the deep ball. Franks, Driver and Ferg excelled in the short to mid range making defenses pay for any lapse in that range. Green and Henderson kept it honest in the flats. Yeah, when the O-line and Ahman Green were DOMINATING the line of scrimmage and run game, it was pretty hard to stop the rest of the seemigly endless weapons. Oh yeah and they had Brett Favre at QB. I forgot to mention that little detail.

I can just picture Clifton, Wahle, Flanagan, Rivera and Tauscher walking up to the line in perfect sinc like some sort of Western battle was about to begin. But enough of yesterday. Are we going to have an identity under Mike McCarthy today? I want to say yes, but I'm having a hard time finding a position group strong enough to dominate. RB's? WR's? OL? QB? You could make an arguement for QB but what can a QB do with pressure in his face and a non existant running game? Not much is the simple answer. In the words of anti-polarbear, McCarthy can only dream of having and offense as dominate as Mike Shermans. The way I see it, APB is right on. This year is not going to be some highlight reel of Brett Favre throwing 5 TD's per game. It is going to be hard fought 17 - 13 games which will be won and lost with defense, special teams and the turnover battle. The season is going to hinge on the defenses ability to come up with crucial stops and Bretts ability to take every thing that is given to him and nothing more. The Packers can win a lot of games but it's going to be done in a different way. Hopefully us Packer fans can hang our hat on a different identity. Hopefully we can watch a dominating defense led by A.J. Hawk and a special team unit strait from hell. We'll see, but I'll bet dollars to doughnuts it's not going to be the offense winning games in 2006.

Just curious what people think our offensive identity will be. I'm thinking short/intermediate passes and a smart, efficiant offense that allows the defense to win games and doesn't go out and lose games. I guess that is what I see as the best case sinerio anyway.

[Badgepack]

Short quick passes/ground game/move the chains/eat up clock.

Know that our defense will get the ball back if we don't score.

[No Mo Moss]

Actually it was THE most prolific offense in the history of the team. Too bad he forgot to get a defense.

[RashanGary]

Joe Johnson playing as advertised and choosing Holliday over Hunt might have meant another ring on Bretts HOF finger.

[No Mo Moss]

Or choosing Randy Moss over Holiday

[RashanGary]

LOL...You never know how that might have turned out. I think Favre would be shattering Marinos records and putting everyone else ions behind.

[chain_gang]

Well I tend to agree that it will be a lot of short and intermidiate routes. Hopefully more Screen passes to the back. With the athletic guards we have it should be a heck of a weapon. More tight end passes, and a more strategic matchups. Like spreading Lee outside on a corner and letting him go up and get it. I just hope they can revitalize the screen play, that was money a few years ago and just started fading away slowly.

[Iron Mike]

I know everyone likes to blame Mike Sherman for everything from 4th and 26 to the 70's outbreak of genital herpes but one thing is for certain, he coached up one of the most dominating offenses in Packers history.

Hmmmm.......too bad that offensive juggernaut couldn't manage a 4th and 1 on the goal line on 1/11/04, or we wouldn't have 4th and 26 in our collective psyches!!!! :evil:

[Chubbyhubby]

Well I tend to agree that it will be a lot of short and intermidiate routes. Hopefully more Screen passes to the back. With the athletic guards we have it should be a heck of a weapon. More tight end passes, and a more strategic matchups. Like spreading Lee outside on a corner and letting him go up and get it. I just hope they can revitalize the screen play, that was money a few years ago and just started fading away slowly.

I would have to agree to that. Passing game short and intermidiate routes. I see more passing the first half of the season due to OL lack of experience. After 6 to 7 games down the road the O line should begin to jell more and we should see a more balanced attack.

The Defense on the other hand, is going to Dominate from Day 1! With our weak schedule this year Our D is going to be really tough to stop in turn we should limit the number of points the other team will have and with a suspect offense we don't need to score alot of points. Look at the Bears team last year, their D was solid and won alot of games for them.

Prediction: if the D is as good as advertised we could go 9-7 this year.

[Joemailman]

In many ways, I think the McCarthy offense will resemble the Holmgren offense. A lot more slant patterns, with a lot less heaving the ball downfield hoping for a big play. However, there will be one key difference. Holmgren always had a pass first mentality, and would use the pass to set up the running game. He modified this somewhat over the years, but not completely. I think McCarthy will place more emphasis on the running game, using play-action to set up the pass. One thing the two offenses have in common is that they both will place more emphasis on utilizing the Tight End downfield. I never understood why Sherman/Rossley didn't take advantage of the team's running prowess by throwing downfield to the Tight Ends more. I think McCarthy will attempt to do that.

[Deputy Nutz]

This offense is going to have to stay conservative and pray that the defense stays in the top ten all year. The defense will also need to improve on creating turnovers to keep this team above .500

This offense alone ain't gonna do it.

[pbmax]

We need to reign in the rampant anti-polar bearism on Sherman's offense.

Scoring Offense
Sherman:
2001-2004: 5,6,4,5 = 5.0 league rank

Holmgren:
1993-1998: 6,4,6,1,2,6 = 4.16

Lombardi:
1960-1966: 2,1,1,2,5,8,4 = 3.29

Dominating, perhaps, but not the best in franchise history.

[MJZiggy]

I read the thread title and thought it was going to be another Walker thread. :oops:

[No Mo Moss]

We need to reign in the rampant anti-polar bearism on Sherman's offense.

Scoring Offense
Sherman:
2001-2004: 5,6,4,5 = 5.0 league rank

Holmgren:
1993-1998: 6,4,6,1,2,6 = 4.16

Lombardi:
1960-1966: 2,1,1,2,5,8,4 = 3.29

Dominating, perhaps, but not the best in franchise history.

Right but in 2002, I believe it was. Shermans offense was the most productive in the history of the franchise. I think that was the right year.

[RashanGary]

There were like 18 teams in teh league during the lombardi years so showing the % of teams each era was better than would me more accurate than the #. Does tha tmake sense?

[pbmax]

There were like 18 teams in the league during the lombardi years so showing the % of teams each era was better than would me more accurate than the #. Does tha tmake sense?
Excellent point NC.

Sherman 28/32= 0.875

Holmgren 27/30= 0.900

Lombardi 12/14= 0.857

I could have taken the time to divide out each year, as Holmgren coached in a 28 and 30 team league and Lombardi coached with 12-15 teams in the league. But, eh.

Actually, Sherman came out ahead of where I thought he would in both cases. 2002 was the year of a rediscovered running game derailed by injuries and culminating in the loss to the Falcons. 2003 was the best year for offense under Sherman and was the 4th and 26 year.

What I remember most about these two regular seasons was watching the Eagles reg season game in 2003 and seeing the Eagles blitz us all day and we couldn't pull our offense together until the 4th quarter. Was my first solid clue that Sherman's game plan/game day management might have some holes.

[b bulldog]

Great, we had a dominant O until playoff time. 4th and 1, does D really win championships, I guess it does.

[RashanGary]

It's funny, you can manufacture points on offense but if your defense sucks the opposition is going to run all over you. There really isn't a way to cover it. Not even for a quarter let alone a full game.

Defense really does win championships.

[Joemailman]

People tend to forget that The Packers had a 14 point lead in the playoff game vs. Philly. A good defense would have made that stand up, especially considering how banged up the Eagles were.

[MadtownPacker]

I dont have any hard feelings towards Sherman anymore. He did what he felt was best to field a winning team and for most of the regular season he did just that. His downfall was the playoffs and what could have been, what should have been (4th and 1).

I see M3's offense playing ball control like most have mentioned. It will give the D time to catch its breath while keeping Favre level headed and avoiding costly INTs. That will neagte the effect of having so many untested receivers and a new star will be born (Jennings?).

Good things will happen on O in 2006.

[Green Bud Packer]

how ironic that sherman's g.m.skills slit the throat of his coaching ability. i'm glad he's gone. if mac can make football fun for b.favre again look out bears.

[b bulldog]

I have lots and lots of hard feelings towards Mike Sherman, our former GM who is now a OLINE COACH :D

[Kiwon]

I don't have any hard feelings against Sherman, especially when you consider that only 4 out of 14 Packer HC have winning records.

He's an OL and assistant Head Coach this year and probably will be offered a HC position next year if the HC turnover rate stays similiar to the recent past. He made his share of personnel mistakes as GM, but so does every team.

Both Seattle or Pittsburgh fans wanted new HCs just a few years ago, but management stood by Holmgren and Cower and their teams became competitive again (yes, yes, TT-lovers, I know that TT's drafting genius was the reason Seattle went to the Super Bowl. I only talking about Sherman as HC, not GM).

[Partial]

I think MM's identity will be a strong running game with a punishing defense. I think they realize without Walker they're going to have a hard time moving the ball vertically, especially post-favre.