Article - The Eye in the Sky

[Bossman641]

I wish we could just point to one guy and say he is the reason for the running game not working, but unfortunately it is all of them. The tackles have never been great at cutting off the backside, and the guards and center too often get throw right back in the backfield. They all can do it, but not consistently, and when you spread that inconsistency across 5 different players it is tough to get any kind of running game going.

I'm starting to warm up to Harlan's (?) idea of Colledge, Spitz, Sitton in the middle just so we have some strength in there.

Just once I would like to see them run for 4-5 yards at a time down after down. Instead we get 1,1,2,-1, 3, 0, 7, 2, 0, 34, 3, 6, 2.

Isn't the goal of the ZBS to get at least 2-3 yards every play? I think I remember Jagz saying that a few years back. By that scorecard, the running game fails way too often.

[SkinBasket]

Is Tootie Robbins dead yet?

[texaspackerbacker]

Re: Eye in the Sky

Great responses, it is nice to talk with educated people.

Here is the deal with the OL that makes my skin crawl. How can they continue to waste draft picks and can't get anyone to block. Christ just get in the way once and awhile. They are never going to be 100% but if you can get 75% that is pretty good.

They make the same mistakes over and over and never seem to be able to learn. My blame at this time has to fall on Coach Campen's shoulders. He sees the same thing we do...

As far as running backs go, put LT, Bryant Westbrook, or AP on the Packers and their production will fall. YOU need to be able to run and if there is ZERO daylight and no where to cut back (even in NICKEL) then you might as well pass it all day and thumb your nose at the D. Run 3-4 wides and keep your best blocking back in and throw. forget about even trying to run. run a draw in the fourth quarter and call it a day!

Don't confuse the ability of the Backs to make a big play as a successful running game. That shows the back have talent. BJack and the rest. There is no where to run. Imagine if they could get some movement on 75% of their running plays what kind of sick yards those backs would put up... The backs aren't the problem. Take away all runs over 20 yards and where are you?? if you average 2 yards a carry and rely on the explosive play, you end up watching the super bowl like last year.

We will see sunday, if they are ready to step it up. If they could run consistantly, on sunday the Lions never make the comeback. Thank god for Benzcain and Charles Woodson or it could have be shameful.

-the EYE in the SKY!

I strongly disagree with your doom and gloom outlook about the Packers O Line, Goat.

Combine your line about Westbrook and Peterson performing worse with the Packers O Line with the FACT that Ryan Grant outgained both of them--and everybody else too--after becoming the starter last season, and it amounts to saying Grant is better--a lot better--than either Peterson or Westbrook. I doubt that is what you mean to say, but put 2 and 2 together, and that's what you get.

I think all things considered, this O Line is doing the job. You actually don't want to give the line credit for those gaping holes that result in runs over 20 yards/long gains in general? I'll take 100 yards gained in the form of 24 two yard gains and one 52 yard TD run over 100 yards in the form of 25 consistent four yard runs anytime.

[Bretsky]

Re: Eye in the Sky

Great responses, it is nice to talk with educated people.

Here is the deal with the OL that makes my skin crawl. How can they continue to waste draft picks and can't get anyone to block. Christ just get in the way once and awhile. They are never going to be 100% but if you can get 75% that is pretty good.

They make the same mistakes over and over and never seem to be able to learn. My blame at this time has to fall on Coach Campen's shoulders. He sees the same thing we do...

As far as running backs go, put LT, Bryant Westbrook, or AP on the Packers and their production will fall. YOU need to be able to run and if there is ZERO daylight and no where to cut back (even in NICKEL) then you might as well pass it all day and thumb your nose at the D. Run 3-4 wides and keep your best blocking back in and throw. forget about even trying to run. run a draw in the fourth quarter and call it a day!

Don't confuse the ability of the Backs to make a big play as a successful running game. That shows the back have talent. BJack and the rest. There is no where to run. Imagine if they could get some movement on 75% of their running plays what kind of sick yards those backs would put up... The backs aren't the problem. Take away all runs over 20 yards and where are you?? if you average 2 yards a carry and rely on the explosive play, you end up watching the super bowl like last year.

We will see sunday, if they are ready to step it up. If they could run consistantly, on sunday the Lions never make the comeback. Thank god for Benzcain and Charles Woodson or it could have be shameful.

-the EYE in the SKY!

I strongly disagree with your doom and gloom outlook about the Packers O Line, Goat.

Combine your line about Westbrook and Peterson performing worse with the Packers O Line with the FACT that Ryan Grant outgained both of them--and everybody else too--after becoming the starter last season, and it amounts to saying Grant is better--a lot better--than either Peterson or Westbrook. I doubt that is what you mean to say, but put 2 and 2 together, and that's what you get.

I think all things considered, this O Line is doing the job. You actually don't want to give the line credit for those gaping holes that result in runs over 20 yards/long gains in general? I'll take 100 yards gained in the form of 24 two yard gains and one 52 yard TD run over 100 yards in the form of 25 consistent four yard runs anytime.

the comparison being made is just for this season. Our QB was pretty hot last year when teams started playing the pass and that allowed Grant to get a great jump start. Then they succeeded together and provided a nice balance. MM did a great job keeping teams off balance as well.

This year our OL has been inconsistent at best blocking for the run. Maybe they are just athletic pass blockers who are not strong enough. Maybe they don't fit the scheme well enough, and maybe they just need to improve.

But they have not been good this year.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Re: Eye in the Sky

But they have not been good this year.

I don't know. Minnesota's run defense is STOUT. They held Joseph Addai to 20 yards on 15 carries, so I tend to think we actually did pretty well against them.

I knew Detroit would be fired up to play better run defense. Kind of sell the farm against the run--which I think they did in the first half. So, I'm not surprised we only gained 120 rushing yards against them.

Considering the OL has been in flux for most of training camp and the season because of injuries, I think they've done just fine.

Hell, we had a much worse start in run blocking last season. I feel pretty good about the OL. I think Spitz is emerging as a solid starter and Colledge seems to be improved. If Sitton is the real deal, then I think we have the makings of a good unit.

I just hope Clifton and Tauscher aren't falling off at the same time as our interior OL is getting better. I don't think so yet, but a couple more games like Detroit and I'll be worried.

[texaspackerbacker]

Re: Eye in the Sky

Great responses, it is nice to talk with educated people.

Here is the deal with the OL that makes my skin crawl. How can they continue to waste draft picks and can't get anyone to block. Christ just get in the way once and awhile. They are never going to be 100% but if you can get 75% that is pretty good.

They make the same mistakes over and over and never seem to be able to learn. My blame at this time has to fall on Coach Campen's shoulders. He sees the same thing we do...

As far as running backs go, put LT, Bryant Westbrook, or AP on the Packers and their production will fall. YOU need to be able to run and if there is ZERO daylight and no where to cut back (even in NICKEL) then you might as well pass it all day and thumb your nose at the D. Run 3-4 wides and keep your best blocking back in and throw. forget about even trying to run. run a draw in the fourth quarter and call it a day!

Don't confuse the ability of the Backs to make a big play as a successful running game. That shows the back have talent. BJack and the rest. There is no where to run. Imagine if they could get some movement on 75% of their running plays what kind of sick yards those backs would put up... The backs aren't the problem. Take away all runs over 20 yards and where are you?? if you average 2 yards a carry and rely on the explosive play, you end up watching the super bowl like last year.

We will see sunday, if they are ready to step it up. If they could run consistantly, on sunday the Lions never make the comeback. Thank god for Benzcain and Charles Woodson or it could have be shameful.

-the EYE in the SKY!

I strongly disagree with your doom and gloom outlook about the Packers O Line, Goat.

Combine your line about Westbrook and Peterson performing worse with the Packers O Line with the FACT that Ryan Grant outgained both of them--and everybody else too--after becoming the starter last season, and it amounts to saying Grant is better--a lot better--than either Peterson or Westbrook. I doubt that is what you mean to say, but put 2 and 2 together, and that's what you get.

I think all things considered, this O Line is doing the job. You actually don't want to give the line credit for those gaping holes that result in runs over 20 yards/long gains in general? I'll take 100 yards gained in the form of 24 two yard gains and one 52 yard TD run over 100 yards in the form of 25 consistent four yard runs anytime.

the comparison being made is just for this season. Our QB was pretty hot last year when teams started playing the pass and that allowed Grant to get a great jump start. Then they succeeded together and provided a nice balance. MM did a great job keeping teams off balance as well.

This year our OL has been inconsistent at best blocking for the run. Maybe they are just athletic pass blockers who are not strong enough. Maybe they don't fit the scheme well enough, and maybe they just need to improve.

But they have not been good this year.

The comparison may be just for this season, but it's mostly the same personnel, and there's no strong indication that they are playing any worse than last season. The only significant difference is Grant's injury--that plus the fact that Minnesota has a great reputation for run defense and Detroit was loading up against the run, basically daring Rodgers to beat them passing--which he did--with significant help from the O Line.

I just don't see any reason to disrespect the performance of the O Line after two very good overall offensive performances.

[sheepshead]

Re: Eye in the Sky

Great responses, it is nice to talk with educated people.

Here is the deal with the OL that makes my skin crawl. How can they continue to waste draft picks and can't get anyone to block. Christ just get in the way once and awhile. They are never going to be 100% but if you can get 75% that is pretty good.

They make the same mistakes over and over and never seem to be able to learn. My blame at this time has to fall on Coach Campen's shoulders. He sees the same thing we do...

As far as running backs go, put LT, Bryant Westbrook, or AP on the Packers and their production will fall. YOU need to be able to run and if there is ZERO daylight and no where to cut back (even in NICKEL) then you might as well pass it all day and thumb your nose at the D. Run 3-4 wides and keep your best blocking back in and throw. forget about even trying to run. run a draw in the fourth quarter and call it a day!

Don't confuse the ability of the Backs to make a big play as a successful running game. That shows the back have talent. BJack and the rest. There is no where to run. Imagine if they could get some movement on 75% of their running plays what kind of sick yards those backs would put up... The backs aren't the problem. Take away all runs over 20 yards and where are you?? if you average 2 yards a carry and rely on the explosive play, you end up watching the super bowl like last year.

We will see sunday, if they are ready to step it up. If they could run consistantly, on sunday the Lions never make the comeback. Thank god for Benzcain and Charles Woodson or it could have be shameful.

-the EYE in the SKY!

What team(nfl) is a good example of what you're talking about? Who can I watch? Also-do you have game films? I find it difficult to totally watch the OL especially when Arods in the shotgun.

Maybe I'm dumb, but I am not follow this actually.

[KYPack]

Re: Eye in the Sky

Great responses, it is nice to talk with educated people.

Here is the deal with the OL that makes my skin crawl. How can they continue to waste draft picks and can't get anyone to block. Christ just get in the way once and awhile. They are never going to be 100% but if you can get 75% that is pretty good.

They make the same mistakes over and over and never seem to be able to learn. My blame at this time has to fall on Coach Campen's shoulders. He sees the same thing we do...

As far as running backs go, put LT, Bryant Westbrook, or AP on the Packers and their production will fall. YOU need to be able to run and if there is ZERO daylight and no where to cut back (even in NICKEL) then you might as well pass it all day and thumb your nose at the D. Run 3-4 wides and keep your best blocking back in and throw. forget about even trying to run. run a draw in the fourth quarter and call it a day!

Don't confuse the ability of the Backs to make a big play as a successful running game. That shows the back have talent. BJack and the rest. There is no where to run. Imagine if they could get some movement on 75% of their running plays what kind of sick yards those backs would put up... The backs aren't the problem. Take away all runs over 20 yards and where are you?? if you average 2 yards a carry and rely on the explosive play, you end up watching the super bowl like last year.

We will see sunday, if they are ready to step it up. If they could run consistantly, on sunday the Lions never make the comeback. Thank god for Benzcain and Charles Woodson or it could have be shameful.

-the EYE in the SKY!

I strongly disagree with your doom and gloom outlook about the Packers O Line, Goat.

Combine your line about Westbrook and Peterson performing worse with the Packers O Line with the FACT that Ryan Grant outgained both of them--and everybody else too--after becoming the starter last season, and it amounts to saying Grant is better--a lot better--than either Peterson or Westbrook. I doubt that is what you mean to say, but put 2 and 2 together, and that's what you get.

I think all things considered, this O Line is doing the job. You actually don't want to give the line credit for those gaping holes that result in runs over 20 yards/long gains in general? I'll take 100 yards gained in the form of 24 two yard gains and one 52 yard TD run over 100 yards in the form of 25 consistent four yard runs anytime.

It ain't doom and gloom, Tex. It's reality. Eric is laying out for you the problem. The Packer interior Oline blocks well in pass pro. They are not getting the job done in the running game. Run blocking is basic. Engage, sustain, and finish the block. Our guard and center combo's engage the DLineman, but don't sustain or finish. IOW, they got no shove.

This problem is a carryover from last season. Last year, the Oline was rated the top pass pro line in the NFL by NFL Outsiders. They were near the bottom in run blocking and dead last in short yardage effectiveness. Those stats are a reflection of the lines' make-up. Our tackles are damn near the best tackles in the league. Cliffy and Tausch regularly shut out the leagues top DE's. DE's are normally most teams top pass rushers. We can get most teams pass rush blocked up. But we don't have a solid unit to establish a running game because we can't execute run blocks in the heart of the line.

There is a lot of light at the end of the tunnel. But right now, our interior line ain't getting the job done in blocking the run. That may change when Sitton and Wells (due to start against Dallas) get back, but right now, it ain't workin'.

[Fritz]

However, KY, I would add that the tackles - specifically Clifton - does seem to have a problem cutting off the backside pursuit. This means Grant is often cutting right back into a defender whom Clifton was unable to seal off.

[Zool]

However, KY, I would add that the tackles - specifically Clifton - does seem to have a problem cutting off the backside pursuit. This means Grant is often cutting right back into a defender whom Clifton was unable to seal off.

Same thing was said about Cliffy last year too. He doesnt like cutting too much. Prolly hates getting back up every play.

[texaspackerbacker]

Re: Eye in the Sky

Great responses, it is nice to talk with educated people.

Here is the deal with the OL that makes my skin crawl. How can they continue to waste draft picks and can't get anyone to block. Christ just get in the way once and awhile. They are never going to be 100% but if you can get 75% that is pretty good.

They make the same mistakes over and over and never seem to be able to learn. My blame at this time has to fall on Coach Campen's shoulders. He sees the same thing we do...

As far as running backs go, put LT, Bryant Westbrook, or AP on the Packers and their production will fall. YOU need to be able to run and if there is ZERO daylight and no where to cut back (even in NICKEL) then you might as well pass it all day and thumb your nose at the D. Run 3-4 wides and keep your best blocking back in and throw. forget about even trying to run. run a draw in the fourth quarter and call it a day!

Don't confuse the ability of the Backs to make a big play as a successful running game. That shows the back have talent. BJack and the rest. There is no where to run. Imagine if they could get some movement on 75% of their running plays what kind of sick yards those backs would put up... The backs aren't the problem. Take away all runs over 20 yards and where are you?? if you average 2 yards a carry and rely on the explosive play, you end up watching the super bowl like last year.

We will see sunday, if they are ready to step it up. If they could run consistantly, on sunday the Lions never make the comeback. Thank god for Benzcain and Charles Woodson or it could have be shameful.

-the EYE in the SKY!

I strongly disagree with your doom and gloom outlook about the Packers O Line, Goat.

Combine your line about Westbrook and Peterson performing worse with the Packers O Line with the FACT that Ryan Grant outgained both of them--and everybody else too--after becoming the starter last season, and it amounts to saying Grant is better--a lot better--than either Peterson or Westbrook. I doubt that is what you mean to say, but put 2 and 2 together, and that's what you get.

I think all things considered, this O Line is doing the job. You actually don't want to give the line credit for those gaping holes that result in runs over 20 yards/long gains in general? I'll take 100 yards gained in the form of 24 two yard gains and one 52 yard TD run over 100 yards in the form of 25 consistent four yard runs anytime.

It ain't doom and gloom, Tex. It's reality. Eric is laying out for you the problem. The Packer interior Oline blocks well in pass pro. They are not getting the job done in the running game. Run blocking is basic. Engage, sustain, and finish the block. Our guard and center combo's engage the DLineman, but don't sustain or finish. IOW, they got no shove.

This problem is a carryover from last season. Last year, the Oline was rated the top pass pro line in the NFL by NFL Outsiders. They were near the bottom in run blocking and dead last in short yardage effectiveness. Those stats are a reflection of the lines' make-up. Our tackles are damn near the best tackles in the league. Cliffy and Tausch regularly shut out the leagues top DE's. DE's are normally most teams top pass rushers. We can get most teams pass rush blocked up. But we don't have a solid unit to establish a running game because we can't execute run blocks in the heart of the line.

There is a lot of light at the end of the tunnel. But right now, our interior line ain't getting the job done in blocking the run. That may change when Sitton and Wells (due to start against Dallas) get back, but right now, it ain't workin'.

No! It's NOT reality. Reality is 13-3/14-4 last season and 2-0 with a new QB, with an ace RB playing hurt, against one very good team and one inspired home team.

Funny you should bring up last season. When I did that, somebody claimed it was irrelevant. That O Line--basically the same personnel as this year--merely allowed a totally unknown RB gain more yards than any other RB in the NFL for the weeks he started.

I wouldn't disagree with a word you wrote about the details of the blocking situation. Smaller more mobile ZBS O Linemen traditionally DON'T do as well in short yardage--although they sure came through in that Sneak on the goal line. Granted, Clifton and Tauscher are getting a little bit old, and maybe not quite getting there in certain situations. Last year, and his one big run this year, Grant didn't need that cut back.

I think this whole idea--knocking the performance of the O Line--is grasping at straws to knock a WINNING TEAM. It took a while for the Packers running game to kick in last season. With time--and a healthy Grant--it WILL do the job this season too--hopefully against the Cowboys. If it takes a little longer, well, it was unlikely we'd go unbeaten anyway, and they ARE the best opponent on the schedule.

So just enjoy the ride and don't try to dig up lame reasons to complain.

[mraynrand]

Is Tootie Robbins dead yet?

'I'm Not dead yet!'

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=grbSQ6O6kbs

[KYPack]

Re: Eye in the Sky

No! It's NOT reality. Reality is 13-3/14-4 last season and 2-0 with a new QB, with an ace RB playing hurt, against one very good team and one inspired home team.

Funny you should bring up last season. When I did that, somebody claimed it was irrelevant. That O Line--basically the same personnel as this year--merely allowed a totally unknown RB gain more yards than any other RB in the NFL for the weeks he started.

I wouldn't disagree with a word you wrote about the details of the blocking situation. Smaller more mobile ZBS O Linemen traditionally DON'T do as well in short yardage--although they sure came through in that Sneak on the goal line. Granted, Clifton and Tauscher are getting a little bit old, and maybe not quite getting there in certain situations. Last year, and his one big run this year, Grant didn't need that cut back.

I think this whole idea--knocking the performance of the O Line--is grasping at straws to knock a WINNING TEAM. It took a while for the Packers running game to kick in last season. With time--and a healthy Grant--it WILL do the job this season too--hopefully against the Cowboys. If it takes a little longer, well, it was unlikely we'd go unbeaten anyway, and they ARE the best opponent on the schedule.

So just enjoy the ride and don't try to dig up lame reasons to complain.

Well, we have a failure to communicate. I don't think pointing out weak areas in the Pack is knocking the team or anything else. What I (and "The Goat") are doing is observing and reporting. We've got a winning record in spite of an inability of our interior line to get runs blocked.

Sometimes I wonder if you watch the games. Every post from you seems to be "You rah, rah, sis boom bah, go Pack go!" & shit.

There isn't one complaint in my post. I ain't yelling, I'm telling.

We need to get some shove from our interior line (& the tackles, too) or we won't be a factor in big games and the play-offs. You must be able to win the alley fight to win the SB.

If you don't believe me, ask the Patriots if a smash mouth team can knock you off your pedastal. It's a goal that must be met & I'm posting the observation that we ain't there yet.

We might be in the future, but right now we are far short of being an effective run blocking line, especially in the interior, and especially in short yardage.

[KYPack]

However, KY, I would add that the tackles - specifically Clifton - does seem to have a problem cutting off the backside pursuit. This means Grant is often cutting right back into a defender whom Clifton was unable to seal off.

Yeah, you are right Fritz, I failed to mention that. I've always thought there might be another underlying problem. Personnel groups feed off & copy their leader. All our receivers play tough, run slants, and focus on YAC, etc., just like DD

Our Olineman excel at pass pro, but don't focus on their run blocks. The leaders of the line are Cliffy and Tausch.

One thing I've been hoping about is that one guy will rise up and become the interior road grader in short yardage that we lack. Maybe Sitton, Barbre, Spitz, I don't care, but some internal leader coming to the forefront could go a long way to helping our problem.

[Noodle]

KY, that is an excellent insight re the effect of position leaders on the makeup of the group. I hadn't thought about it, but what you say makes sense.

I wonder if Cliffy's chronic procedure penalties (he's been doing this for years) has also rubbed off on the young 'uns. You would certainly expect a tighter ship in this regard if the old dog on the line set the example and refused to tolerate stupid stuff like that.