13 Running Plays

[bobblehead]

Those 13 are even highly inflated IMO. Most of the success was off of draws that were surprising soft passing defenses. Not saying that those yards don't count but its not like you can base a legit rushing attack off of draws.

When its 3rd and two I'd like to be able to trot out there with a bunch of TEs and FBs and take those two yards while the defense is expecting it.

See, I don't even care about 3rd and 2. We can surprise a run stacked defense in that case with a pass play quite often. Its a manageable situation.

In the NFL you have to be able to do the opposite of what the D is geared up to stop. You must be able to run and pass the football. We had a team with the ears pinned back the entire 4th quarter and we couldn't even attempt to run it.

[vince]

Re: 13 Running Plays

What short passing game? I saw a lot of intermediate stuff, some longer developing and then some WR screens.

When they ran a couple of slants and screens, they looked wide open.

This. The threat of the run has to be there too though. In order to threaten the run, you have to line up on running formations and yeah, run it some. I don't recall much play action either.

It looks like Rodgers got his wish from last week, and we all now see how that worked out. In particular once their no. 1 receiver Finley went down, they should have adapted the game plan. The offense is far less dynamic all the way around without him in it.

[Gunakor]

In order to have a good running game, you have to call running plays. To that end I'm not sure how much of a positive effect a new RB would have had in any of our games this year. Maybe today Lynch has the speed to score a TD on that 71 yard carry from B-Jax but we scored a TD on that drive anyway; the net result would have been the same. Beyond that, I'm not sure what Chris Johnson could do with 10 measly carries. Probably not a whole lot better than the 11.5 avg. that Jackson had today.

I'm officially going on record here as saying that I think our run game is fine. We just need to call on it more often and things will settle down for this offense. There aren't any gamebreakers in our backfield, but they're more than capable of pounding out 3 or 4 yards on first down to set up a manageable second down. They can run out the clock to secure a victory, which we saw last week against a pretty decent front 7 for the Lions. They can't do everything, but they're more than capable of doing what we need them to do. Just let them do it.

[mraynrand]

Pack had some success running draws on 2nd and long - at least twice - early. The proof is in the pudding - stagnant offense the entire 4th quarter - yet again. I think it's all Stubby - he is going to run his stuff and why the hell should he have to adjust, even when the defense figures it out and has adjusted to his gameplan? Stubby, Stubby, Stubby.

[Cheesehead Craig]

You have to be able to run the ball if you want to throw those intermediate and deep stuff. Play-action works a whole lot better when you run the ball. Why would you want to take that out of your playbook?

[pbmax]

Pack had some success running draws on 2nd and long - at least twice - early. The proof is in the pudding - stagnant offense the entire 4th quarter - yet again. I think it's all Stubby - he is going to run his stuff and why the hell should he have to adjust, even when the defense figures it out and has adjusted to his gameplan? Stubby, Stubby, Stubby.

At least one of those, Rodgers seemed to audible to. I don't know if it was run-pass option or a true audible, but they saw things they could run against.

It is possible they were calling stuff at the line dependent on defensive alignment.

[mraynrand]

Pack had some success running draws on 2nd and long - at least twice - early. The proof is in the pudding - stagnant offense the entire 4th quarter - yet again. I think it's all Stubby - he is going to run his stuff and why the hell should he have to adjust, even when the defense figures it out and has adjusted to his gameplan? Stubby, Stubby, Stubby.

At least one of those, Rodgers seemed to audible to. I don't know if it was run-pass option or a true audible, but they saw things they could run against.

It is possible they were calling stuff at the line dependent on defensive alignment.

OK. And it's possible on a couple of those sacks late that Rodgers didn't diagnose/detect the defensive alignment properly. So maybe Stubby, Stubby, Rodgers? Maybe give some credit to Williams and the Wash D too.

[vince]

When questioned about the lack of run plays, McCarthy said there were a lot of run-pass option plays called that he felt were missed run opportunities.

[packers11]

When questioned about the lack of run plays, McCarthy said there were a lot of run-pass option plays called that he felt were missed run opportunities.

I think its more on Rodgers audibles to passing plays then MM not calling them... Aaron clearly stated last week he wanted to go 4-5 wide and throw it around... Its his own words, he'd rather throw the ball then run it...

[Joemailman]

Packers are now 15th in the NFL in rushing yardage. 6th in YPC. At what point does the media stop saying the Packers have no running game, and start asking why they're not running it more?

[pbmax]

Pack had some success running draws on 2nd and long - at least twice - early. The proof is in the pudding - stagnant offense the entire 4th quarter - yet again. I think it's all Stubby - he is going to run his stuff and why the hell should he have to adjust, even when the defense figures it out and has adjusted to his gameplan? Stubby, Stubby, Stubby.

At least one of those, Rodgers seemed to audible to. I don't know if it was run-pass option or a true audible, but they saw things they could run against.

It is possible they were calling stuff at the line dependent on defensive alignment.

OK. And it's possible on a couple of those sacks late that Rodgers didn't diagnose/detect the defensive alignment properly. So maybe Stubby, Stubby, Rodgers? Maybe give some credit to Williams and the Wash D too.

I don't think either had a good handle on the D they were facing after the 1st Quarter for some reason.

Did anyone else see Rodgers bend down and try to look through legs to see the Defense? Is that what he was doing or did he have a cramp?

[Smidgeon]

Pack had some success running draws on 2nd and long - at least twice - early. The proof is in the pudding - stagnant offense the entire 4th quarter - yet again. I think it's all Stubby - he is going to run his stuff and why the hell should he have to adjust, even when the defense figures it out and has adjusted to his gameplan? Stubby, Stubby, Stubby.

At least one of those, Rodgers seemed to audible to. I don't know if it was run-pass option or a true audible, but they saw things they could run against.

It is possible they were calling stuff at the line dependent on defensive alignment.

OK. And it's possible on a couple of those sacks late that Rodgers didn't diagnose/detect the defensive alignment properly. So maybe Stubby, Stubby, Rodgers? Maybe give some credit to Williams and the Wash D too.

I don't think either had a good handle on the D they were facing after the 1st Quarter for some reason.

Did anyone else see Rodgers bend down and try to look through legs to see the Defense? Is that what he was doing or did he have a cramp?

I saw that and just thought he was trying to communicate with his center. Get some eye contact in a loud environment to make sure Wells knew the audible or protection or something.

[red]

13 running plays called compared to around 50 passing plays. you can't win in the nfl like that

thats not all a-rod changing the plays at the line. thats a piss poor game plan

and the worst part is that the running games was working pretty damn good

a-rod and m3 need to pull each others head out of their asses and get this figured out

a 5 to 1 pass run ration is a recipe for disaster