Packers running game sucks

[pbmax]

The scout has also confused correlation with causation. There is indeed a difference between the approach defenses use against Rodgers compared to Favre. But the difference isn't the QB, its the gameplan.

McCarthy, whenever he has had a second half lead has gone heavily to the run. This has the unsurprising result of forcing opposing Defenses to concentrate on the run. Favre threw much more last year, regardless of score in the second half.

The difference between the two QBs, is that Favre was probably more successful throwing against a defense anticipating the pass. He was quicker with decisions and unafraid. Rodgers has held the ball two long on some of our three man routes we use in the second half on third and long with 7 blockers in.

The stat we should look at is attempt for each offense, run vs pass, by half. I am also curious if Favre, despite scoring below this rate last year, actually had more offensive plays. It seems like the Packer's O, this year, has a lot of short, field position neutral drives. Not three and outs, but maybe 5 and out. Our 3rd down conversion rate is good, but it seems like the O doesn't move the field position game in our favor much, and has been composed of shorter drives. Penalties, undoubtedly, play a large role in this.

[Iron Mike]

So, as the radio personality Dick the Bruiser used to say in Detroit back in the 80's, "What does this mean?"

You mean "former Green Bay Packer Dick Afflis?"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Afflis

[Cheesehead Craig]

The Vikings will improve, but not very much; .

Where do you see improvement coming from the Vikings? Anyone? I see them as being in a gradual decline. Where is the upside with that team? (Rastak, how can the Vikings improve as the season progresses?)

I'd actually put Jackson back in. He sucks, but at least he's got upside - no matter how unlikely that getting to that upside seems. Ferrotte has not improved their team enough to keep him in there, because he has no upside.

I think it's going to be hard for them to take the next step until they get some decent play from that position.

I fully agree that TJack sucks, but putting him back in isn't going to help at all. He's not an NFL QB whatsoever, so why not go with Frerotte? Frerotte is putting up far better numbers than TJack ever did. Let's face it, this is the Vikings window with their defense and OL. In 2 seasons, Phat Williams, Darren Sharper, Matt Birk and possibly Antoine Winfield will be gone and they have no viable replacements for any of them. They are in a win-now mode as Childress is on the hot seat. They don't have time to see on TJack. The Vikes offense has done much better with Gus so they are going to stick with him for the season.

Gus has a very limited shelf life and he's not much more than a stopgap QB for this season. But he is clearly their best option right now to win.

[Tony Oday]

They will get Derek Anderson in a trade next year.

The Vikes need to win next year or its over.

[MadtownPacker]

Packrulz - Can you add a link to the article in the main post? Thanks man.

[Guiness]

Okay, Tex, for what it's worth:

Last year after seven games, the Packers had a total of 499 rushing yards.

This year, after seven games, the Packers have a total of 707 yards rushing.

Lst year after seven games, the Packers had a total of 1967 passing yards.

This year, after seven games, the Packers have a total of 1595 passing yards.


So, as the radio personality Dick the Bruiser used to say in Detroit back in the 80's, "What does this mean?"

'What does this mean' for sure.

But come on Fritz, you certainly know better than to just quote the rushing numbers - I don't know (and won't check, because I don't care) but I suspect that we have a ton more rushing attempts then we did through the first 7 games last year as well.

But it doesn't matter. As they say, there are lies, damn lies, and statistics. If you want to know how we're doing, watch the games, don't read the lines. Truth is, my eyes tell me our running game is not as effective as it was in the second half of last year. It's also more effective then it was the first half of last year.

[Scott Campbell]

Expect to see the worst of me more often.

And here?

[texaspackerbacker]

The Vikings will improve, but not very much; .

Where do you see improvement coming from the Vikings? Anyone? I see them as being in a gradual decline. Where is the upside with that team? (Rastak, how can the Vikings improve as the season progresses?)

First of all, this was an off-hand remark. I don't claim to know or care that much about the Vikings.

They have, however, IMO, played worse than their talent level so far. They have that highly praised defense, and they have what ought to be an excellent O Line. And anything we can say about Ryan Grant picking up his game ought to be at least as true for Adrian Peterson. If he gets healthy, I doubt any RB in the NFL is as good as he is. I was really afraid that Frerotte was going to come in and just manage games--play not to lose with Peterson doing the heavy lifting. That still coukld end up being the case with Frerotte or even Bollinger or Jackson or somebody else.

I'm certainly not saying the Vikings are Super Bowl or even playoff material, but I'd be surprised if they didn't play a little bit better than they have.

[Zool]

Prolly wont be Bollinger. I think he's in Dallas now.

[retailguy]

Prolly wont be Bollinger. I think he's in Dallas now.

Guess that leaves John David Booty... He's the #3 now.

[texaspackerbacker]

Okay, Tex, for what it's worth:

Last year after seven games, the Packers had a total of 499 rushing yards.

This year, after seven games, the Packers have a total of 707 yards rushing.

Lst year after seven games, the Packers had a total of 1967 passing yards.

This year, after seven games, the Packers have a total of 1595 passing yards.


So, as the radio personality Dick the Bruiser used to say in Detroit back in the 80's, "What does this mean?"

I have fond memories of going to my grandma's house on Saturday afternoons and watching wrestling with her. She was a true believer, and she really hated Dick the Bruiser and Killer Kowalski. I digress.

Back to football. Thank you, Fritz, for the research.

I don't suppose it means much, but it certainly is in the realm of possibility that things will click like last season with the Packers running game. And the other thing illustrated is that the running game really hasn't been that bad this year.

All things considered, the Packers aren't in too bad position seven weeks into the season. I like our chances a whole lot better than either the Bears or Vikings.

[packrulz]

Packrulz - Can you add a link to the article in the main post? Thanks man.

Done. Sorry, I thought I did.

[RashanGary]

I think the Packers run game is more consistant than it has been in a long time. It's not getting the big, gaping runs just yet, but Rodgers has been in 3rd and 5 a whole lot more than 3rd and 9 and we've been converting first downs.

I see improvement and I think they will be better on offense as the year goes on.


It's the defense I'm worried about.

[Bretsky]

I think there is reason to be concerned about the running game.

Grant is getting an huge amount of chances for the production he's giving.

I was always a fan of GB signing Grant for the deal they gave him as our #1 RB; I'm starting to wonder if I was wrong.

[Fritz]

Okay, Tex, for what it's worth:

Last year after seven games, the Packers had a total of 499 rushing yards.

This year, after seven games, the Packers have a total of 707 yards rushing.

Lst year after seven games, the Packers had a total of 1967 passing yards.

This year, after seven games, the Packers have a total of 1595 passing yards.


So, as the radio personality Dick the Bruiser used to say in Detroit back in the 80's, "What does this mean?"

'What does this mean' for sure.

But come on Fritz, you certainly know better than to just quote the rushing numbers - I don't know (and won't check, because I don't care) but I suspect that we have a ton more rushing attempts then we did through the first 7 games last year as well.

But it doesn't matter. As they say, there are lies, damn lies, and statistics. If you want to know how we're doing, watch the games, don't read the lines. Truth is, my eyes tell me our running game is not as effective as it was in the second half of last year. It's also more effective then it was the first half of last year.

Guineness, I was curious and prompted by Tex's line - "somebody should" do a comparison of rushing after 7 games last year and this. So I did. And no, I didn't find the number of attempts.

What are you exactly calling me out for? I didn't claim any conclusions, and I don't know that you can say anything too specific. I'm not sure you can say that the Packer running game is a lot better this year than through the first seven games last yea - as you noted, you need the number of attempts (though there was lots of criticism after the 2 - 3 start that MM wasn't sticking to the run).

You'd also have to account for the offensive line. Are they better through the first seven games this year than the first seven last year? I don't know.

Is it that, as some have claimed, Grant's success last year was due to Favre? Hard to say. The team did have 900 yards rushing through the last seven regular season games last year, and most of those were Grant's.
But I don't think that can directly be attributed to Favre, as Arod has been an effective QB this year so far.

So it's hard to say. My own sense is that Grant seems to be missing cutbacks and that Clifton is a great pass blocker but not so good run blocking when he's the backside guy. But I don't really know, though I expect the team to run better this year in the second half, if the line can stay healthy.