Predict the Packers Win/Loss Record

[hoosier]

My prediction for the season is that by week 4, we are 2-2. MM has averaged 13.7 running plays a game at this point. I make my standard week 5 post about defenses teeing off on our QB, not honoring the run, our OL being on their heels and tiring out down the stretch because of it, yada yada yada.

PB, and many others tell me I am nuts and its a passing league. They explain to me that 3 screen plays a game is a great substitute for the run game. They let me know that no one runs the ball anymore....ever. At the end of the season, we have figured out how to run the ball enough to keep our OL fresh, wear down defenses, and keep them honest. We sneak into the playoffs and get to the superbowl where we meet the run first, stop the run first Pittsburg Steelers. Rodgers is brilliant, and Grant gets 19 carries for 75 yards (7 in the first quarter). Everyone says "I told you so, its a passing league".

If you actually look at the numbers you will see that since 2007 McCarthy's gameplans have shown a lot more interest in balance than you're implying. If you want to predict dysfunction followed by magical transformation, you should be saying that the Packers will start out running the ball so badly that you'd think they were sending Brandon Jackson into a stacked goal-line defense every play, but that by the second half the backs are starting to look like Edgar Bennett in the mud.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I looked at the poll graph and it appears to be giving me the finger. why the hostility?

[Joemailman]

In the first 4 games last year, the Packers averaged 24 rushes per game for about 94 YPG. Despite the slow offensive start, the Packers would have started out 4-0 if not for the 18 penalty fiasco at Chicago. Then the injuries really started to pile up. My sense is that an over-reliance on the long pass early in the year has been a problem. I think the offense works better when Arod is getting rid of the ball quickly, avoiding sacks and letting his receivers make plays.

[AtlPackFan]

11-5. No logical reason....just what I feel.

[bobblehead]

I looked at the poll graph and it appears to be giving me the finger. why the hostility?

you simply must STOP reading between the lines.

[bobblehead]

In the first 4 games last year, the Packers averaged 24 rushes per game for about 94 YPG. Despite the slow offensive start, the Packers would have started out 4-0 if not for the 18 penalty fiasco at Chicago. Then the injuries really started to pile up. My sense is that an over-reliance on the long pass early in the year has been a problem. I think the offense works better when Arod is getting rid of the ball quickly, avoiding sacks and letting his receivers make plays.

Lets subtract Arod running for his life and get accurate numbers. Thru 6 games they averaged 18 rushing attempts per game. The first 2 they had 28 to beat Philly and 20 in a blowout of buffalo. Then they ran a whopping 13 times and lost to Chicago. 18 times in damn near losing to detroit, but at the end of the game they ran it 8 times in the final drive to seal it. By running it 10 times the first 3 1/2 quarters they almost blew a nice lead provided by a CWood pick6. In the first quarter they did run it very effectively. Week 5 was a huge 13 rush attempts in a loss. Bjack was tearing Washington a new one at 11 yards a pop though. I admit that Arod's concussion and bad officiatiing lost this game as well as the next one where we ran 17 times at Miami.

My point is this, and I was having a bit of fun in my 2011 predictions. There are times when MM forgets that we are allowed to hand the ball off. Often times he goes 2 quarters calling about 1 or 2 running plays and the result is that defenses T off and our OLine is put in a no win fight resulting in Arod getting mauled. All I really ask is that we cut down on the 1st and 10 empty backfield shotgun formations.

[Joemailman]

I would agree that MM does sometimes seem to abandon the running game. As for last year, losing Grant might have had a lot to do with it. Jackson and Kuhn didn't make anyone forget Ahman Green. If he's not running it much this year with a healthy Grant and Starks, I'll join the chorus of those saying run the ball.

By the way, I was at the Detroit game, and the Packers simply didn't have the ball much as the Lions controlled the ball with a short passing game. The Packers only ran 38 offensive plays all day. They actually ran it more than they threw it.

[ThunderDan]

I would agree that MM does sometimes seem to abandon the running game. As for last year, losing Grant might have had a lot to do with it. Jackson and Kuhn didn't make anyone forget Ahman Green. If he's not running it much this year with a healthy Grant and Starks, I'll join the chorus of those saying run the ball.

By the way, I was at the Detroit game, and the Packers simply didn't have the ball much as the Lions controlled the ball with a short passing game. The Packers only ran 38 offensive plays all day. They actually ran it more than they threw it.

I was at that game also. After the game it felt more like the Packers lost than won. If our D didn't stop Lion drives for FGs it would have been a horrible result.

[pbmax]

I would point out that correlation does not mean causation, but them someone is going to feel compelled to begin to post graphs about pirates.

Teams run when they win because when they are winning, they run to not risk losing possession and to kill clock. Not all games work out that way, but the majority do. Running is a low risk, low reward strategy. It makes less sense when the score is close than when one team has a lead.

And it surpasses understanding how banging bodies together at the LOS on a designed run call is more tiring that making D lineman and LBs run all over the field (after a typical pass rush) to then chase Rodgers. What wears teams out more, running or passing? Judging by the O line in preseason, the no huddle was wearing out both sides of the line.

[Brohm]

13-3, we'll have some clunkers in there.

[Joemailman]

I would point out that correlation does not mean causation, but them someone is going to feel compelled to begin to post graphs about pirates.

Teams run when they win because when they are winning, they run to not risk losing possession and to kill clock. Not all games work out that way, but the majority do. Running is a low risk, low reward strategy. It makes less sense when the score is close than when one team has a lead.

And it surpasses understanding how banging bodies together at the LOS on a designed run call is more tiring that making D lineman and LBs run all over the field (after a typical pass rush) to then chase Rodgers. What wears teams out more, running or passing? Judging by the O line in preseason, the no huddle was wearing out both sides of the line.

I think what wears out a defense is the inability to get off the field. It may not matter whether the opponent is primarily running or passing. I do think teams that can run the ball have a better chance at putting together long drives that will tire a defense.

[bobblehead]

I would agree that MM does sometimes seem to abandon the running game. As for last year, losing Grant might have had a lot to do with it. Jackson and Kuhn didn't make anyone forget Ahman Green. If he's not running it much this year with a healthy Grant and Starks, I'll join the chorus of those saying run the ball.

By the way, I was at the Detroit game, and the Packers simply didn't have the ball much as the Lions controlled the ball with a short passing game. The Packers only ran 38 offensive plays all day. They actually ran it more than they threw it.

Say what? Its not a chorus, its a solo performance. :P As I pointed out BJack averaged 11 a carry in the one game we had 13 carries in. I am not talking about how a play ended up. In the Detroit games we called MANY more passes than we did rushes. We just ended up with ARod running scared as the D wasn't honoring the run.

[woodbuck27]

OUR team should do very well and I mean given that we don't suffer extreme adversity. If we get a running game look out 'the rest of the NFL'. We need to get going on the ground. That will allow for more flexibility managing the clock and keep OUR 'D' off the field....and over the long haul that should translate into less injuries...but that might be offset by the effects long term of the LOCK OUT; all of the teams face that issue. We're going to see lots of neww faces in the NFL this season as regulars go down and the replacements step up.

I see a slow start till we get some jelling on our lines. Then we get it together.

Saints: L
@Panthers: W
@ Chicago: L
Denver: W
@ Atlanta: L
St. Louis: W
@ Minnesota: W
@ San Diego: L
Minnesota: W
Tampa Bay: W
@ Detroit: W
@ New York Giants: L
Oakland: W
@ Kansas City: W
Chicago: W
Detroit: W

Final REGULAR season record: 11-5

GO PACKERS !

[bobblehead]

I would point out that correlation does not mean causation, but them someone is going to feel compelled to begin to post graphs about pirates.

Teams run when they win because when they are winning, they run to not risk losing possession and to kill clock. Not all games work out that way, but the majority do. Running is a low risk, low reward strategy. It makes less sense when the score is close than when one team has a lead.

And it surpasses understanding how banging bodies together at the LOS on a designed run call is more tiring that making D lineman and LBs run all over the field (after a typical pass rush) to then chase Rodgers. What wears teams out more, running or passing? Judging by the O line in preseason, the no huddle was wearing out both sides of the line.

How many running plays out of the no huddle? I played OL, and trust me, backpeddling and trying to control a maniac intent on killing your QB while at a full head of steam is more tiring and painful to the OL than it is to the DL. Run plays however allowed me to fire out of my stance and drill the DL before he got set. Then I could have him off balance and push him around while he resisted MY forward momentum.

No comparison as to which is more tiring and difficult for and offensive lineman. Add to it that when the D stops even THINKING about the run, their charge is even more fierce to defend when the OL is backpeddling.

Hopefully it isn't surpassing your understanding now.

As for the self fullfilling prophecy, there is some truth to that....except that in my examples of games we lost or almost lost while not running the ball entailed us having a lead most of the game.

[swede]

Thanks, Brandon. I borrowed your formatting

Saints: Win
@Panthers: Win
@ Chicago: Loss
Denver: Win
@ Atlanta: Loss
St. Louis: Win
@ Minnesota: Win
@ San Diego: Win
Minnesota: Win
Tampa Bay: Win
@ Detroit: Loss
@ New York Giants: Loss
Oakland: Win
@ Kansas City: Win big (Haley blows a blood vessel and bleeds from the eyes as he screams at staff.)
Chicago: Win Big (Coach Lovey looks cold and friendless. Bears fans question whether or not he could beat Ditka in a footrace.)
Detroit: Win

Final REGULAR season record: 12-4