Bulaga hurt?

[wist43]

Yes. 16th in the League in running attempts with one of the poorest run games in the League. You could argue McCarthy last year was way too fond of running the ball.

And a good majority of those carries happened early with the score close or with an early lead. If the concern with Bach is pass protecting, expect more of the same run to protect Rodgers play calls.

We've played around with these stats before...

To me, if you want to evaluate the run game more honestly, you have to look at rushing attempts by RB's, and necessarily have to take out QB scrambles and WR runs.

We may have been 16th in rushing attempts, but consider a comparison to San Diego - who has Philip Rivers limping around behind the LOS. They finished 27th in rushing attempts.

Take out their non-RB attempts, i.e. Rivers had 27 atts, and couple of WR's had a few attemts... their RB attempts = 378.

Take out Rodgers scrambles (54), and the other non-RB attempts... and our RB attempts = 365.

To me, the evaluation of the running game is how did your team perform when handing the ball to your principle RB's?? There are teams where you would throw that out, i.e. SF and Wash. most notably - but when we're talking about the running game, we should be talking about how our team performs with our RB's toting the rock.

Our RB's collectively averaged 3.5 yds/carry... take out our non-RB carries, and our rushing attempts relative to the rest of the league drop us quite a bit - and better indicator of the fact that we simply cannot run the football.

[Pugger]

"Time after time, the rookie tried to get the last shove in. That might not be important in the outcome of a play, but over time a player that seeks to establish a level of physical superiority eventually will win out."

This gives me hope. Other than Lang, we don't have a guy who does this. Maybe sitton a bit, but not like guys in SF do it. I like battlers in my OL. I haven't seen any of the young guys yet, but this gives me some hope.

From what I hear Sitton doesn't back down to anyone. EDS might be like that too.

[pbmax]

Non Primary QB Rushing Statistics (ARI, PHI, KAN, SFO and JAX all have multiple QBs due to partial seasons-I did not combine QBs if a single starter got past 10 starts)

Non starting QBs (Tebow) and WR (Cobb) runs are counted because they are called runs

If you want to skip the fun, GB is 18th in League Rank. San Diego does leap frog them as wist helpfully points out.

								Rushing	Rushing	Rushing	Rushing	QB	Non-QB
Rk	Tm	Year	G	W	L	T	W-L%	Att	Yds	Y/A	TD	Rush	Att
1	NWE	2012	16	12	4	0	0.75	523	2184	4.18	25	23	500
2	HOU	2012	16	12	4	0	0.75	508	2123	4.18	19	21	487
3	NYJ	2012	16	6	10	0	0.375	494	1896	3.84	12	22	472
4	DEN	2012	16	13	3	0	0.813	481	1832	3.81	12	23	458
5	KAN	2012	16	2	14	0	0.125	500	2395	4.79	9	46	454
6	SEA	2012	16	11	5	0	0.688	536	2579	4.81	16	94	442
7	CHI	2012	16	10	6	0	0.625	470	1970	4.19	11	41	429
8	MIN	2012	16	10	6	0	0.625	486	2634	5.42	16	60	426
9	BAL	2012	16	10	6	0	0.625	444	1901	4.28	17	32	412
10	WAS	2012	16	10	6	0	0.625	519	2709	5.22	22	120	399
11	SFO	2012	16	11	4	1	0.719	492	2491	5.06	17	94	398
12	BUF	2012	16	6	10	0	0.375	442	2217	5.02	12	48	394
13	MIA	2012	16	7	9	0	0.438	440	1802	4.1	15	49	391
14	NYG	2012	16	9	7	0	0.563	409	1862	4.55	18	20	389
15	PIT	2012	16	8	8	0	0.5	412	1537	3.73	8	26	386
16	SDG	2012	16	7	9	0	0.438	411	1461	3.55	4	27	384
17	CIN	2012	16	10	6	0	0.625	430	1745	4.06	11	47	383
18	GNB	2012	16	11	5	0	0.688	433	1702	3.93	9	54	379
19	IND	2012	16	11	5	0	0.688	440	1671	3.8	11	62	378
20	TAM	2012	16	7	9	0	0.438	416	1837	4.42	13	39	377
21	STL	2012	16	7	8	1	0.469	410	1714	4.18	5	37	373
22	CLE	2012	16	5	11	0	0.313	396	1593	4.02	12	27	369
23	OAK	2012	16	4	12	0	0.25	376	1420	3.78	4	18	358
24	DET	2012	16	4	12	0	0.25	391	1613	4.13	17	35	356
25	NOR	2012	16	7	9	0	0.438	370	1577	4.26	10	15	355
26	ATL	2012	16	13	3	0	0.813	378	1397	3.7	12	34	344
27	PHI	2012	16	4	12	0	0.25	413	1874	4.54	10	73	340
28	TEN	2012	16	6	10	0	0.375	378	1687	4.46	10	41	337
29	CAR	2012	16	7	9	0	0.438	462	2088	4.52	21	127	335
30	ARI	2012	16	5	11	0	0.313	352	1204	3.42	10	24	328
31	DAL	2012	16	8	8	0	0.5	355	1265	3.56	8	30	325
32	JAX	2012	16	2	14	0	0.125	358	1369	3.82	5	37	321

[Pugger]

Loved what Daniels said about Bak here:

“The first day I did go against him and he rolled me back about 6 yards,” defensive end Mike Daniels told Bob McGinn of the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel about Bakhtiari’s drive-blocking. “He’s a long guy. Strong kid. You can tell he’s been well-coached. He reminds me of Sitton. He’s got that real nice, cool personality, but when he gets on the field he turns into a psychopath.”

[wist43]

Non Primary QB Rushing Statistics (ARI, PHI, KAN, SFO and JAX all have multiple QBs due to partial seasons-I did not combine QBs if a single starter got past 10 starts)

Non starting QBs (Tebow) and WR (Cobb) runs are counted because they are called runs

If you want to skip the fun, GB is 18th in League Rank. San Diego does leap frog them as wist helpfully points out.

								Rushing	Rushing	Rushing	Rushing	QB	Non-QB
Rk	Tm	Year	G	W	L	T	W-L%	Att	Yds	Y/A	TD	Rush	Att
1	NWE	2012	16	12	4	0	0.75	523	2184	4.18	25	23	500
2	HOU	2012	16	12	4	0	0.75	508	2123	4.18	19	21	487
3	NYJ	2012	16	6	10	0	0.375	494	1896	3.84	12	22	472
4	DEN	2012	16	13	3	0	0.813	481	1832	3.81	12	23	458
5	KAN	2012	16	2	14	0	0.125	500	2395	4.79	9	46	454
6	SEA	2012	16	11	5	0	0.688	536	2579	4.81	16	94	442
7	CHI	2012	16	10	6	0	0.625	470	1970	4.19	11	41	429
8	MIN	2012	16	10	6	0	0.625	486	2634	5.42	16	60	426
9	BAL	2012	16	10	6	0	0.625	444	1901	4.28	17	32	412
10	WAS	2012	16	10	6	0	0.625	519	2709	5.22	22	120	399
11	SFO	2012	16	11	4	1	0.719	492	2491	5.06	17	94	398
12	BUF	2012	16	6	10	0	0.375	442	2217	5.02	12	48	394
13	MIA	2012	16	7	9	0	0.438	440	1802	4.1	15	49	391
14	NYG	2012	16	9	7	0	0.563	409	1862	4.55	18	20	389
15	PIT	2012	16	8	8	0	0.5	412	1537	3.73	8	26	386
16	SDG	2012	16	7	9	0	0.438	411	1461	3.55	4	27	384
17	CIN	2012	16	10	6	0	0.625	430	1745	4.06	11	47	383
18	GNB	2012	16	11	5	0	0.688	433	1702	3.93	9	54	379
19	IND	2012	16	11	5	0	0.688	440	1671	3.8	11	62	378
20	TAM	2012	16	7	9	0	0.438	416	1837	4.42	13	39	377
21	STL	2012	16	7	8	1	0.469	410	1714	4.18	5	37	373
22	CLE	2012	16	5	11	0	0.313	396	1593	4.02	12	27	369
23	OAK	2012	16	4	12	0	0.25	376	1420	3.78	4	18	358
24	DET	2012	16	4	12	0	0.25	391	1613	4.13	17	35	356
25	NOR	2012	16	7	9	0	0.438	370	1577	4.26	10	15	355
26	ATL	2012	16	13	3	0	0.813	378	1397	3.7	12	34	344
27	PHI	2012	16	4	12	0	0.25	413	1874	4.54	10	73	340
28	TEN	2012	16	6	10	0	0.375	378	1687	4.46	10	41	337
29	CAR	2012	16	7	9	0	0.438	462	2088	4.52	21	127	335
30	ARI	2012	16	5	11	0	0.313	352	1204	3.42	10	24	328
31	DAL	2012	16	8	8	0	0.5	355	1265	3.56	8	30	325
32	JAX	2012	16	2	14	0	0.125	358	1369	3.82	5	37	321

I'd prefer to look strictly at RB's - and throw out the running QB teams... if you throw out their starting QB stats, their rushing attempts would drop disproportionately.

I would almost throw NE out as well just b/c they're so gimmicky - and I, as should everyone, hate Belichick, lol...

Anyway, by looking at just RB's - it gives a better indicator of what kind of shape a teams actual running game is in. The Packers running game is abysmal - we are a passing team first and foremost. It is what it is...

Everyone seems to be pinning their hopes on a lightweight rookie and the Marshmellow reshaping his body... they're going to be pretty disappointed I fear.

[Upnorth]

I'd prefer to look strictly at RB's - and throw out the running QB teams... if you throw out their starting QB stats, their rushing attempts would drop disproportionately.

I would almost throw NE out as well just b/c they're so gimmicky - and I, as should everyone, hate Belichick, lol...

Anyway, by looking at just RB's - it gives a better indicator of what kind of shape a teams actual running game is in. The Packers running game is abysmal - we are a passing team first and foremost. It is what it is...

Everyone seems to be pinning their hopes on a lightweight rookie and the Marshmellow reshaping his body... they're going to be pretty disappointed I fear.

We are a passing team first and foremost, and we should be as we have the most efficient passing game in the league. Having a more efficient running game would be great, but if we run as effectivley as last year I hope we pass more. The run game would be a great compliment but not a necessity.

[bobblehead]

Yes. 16th in the League in running attempts with one of the poorest run games in the League. You could argue McCarthy last year was way too fond of running the ball.

And a good majority of those carries happened early with the score close or with an early lead. If the concern with Bach is pass protecting, expect more of the same run to protect Rodgers play calls.

There we go with statistics again. Where did we rank in % of plays called being runs? How about the first half of the Seattle game when ARod was getting hammered. How about in SF?

I just rewatched SF vs. Atl, and even down 2 scores in the second half they kept calling running plays. MM calls them at times, but at other times he suspiciously forgets its allowed.

I'm not saying I want to be the vikings, we have rodgers and should pass plenty. I just want enough effective running to keep a D honest.

I'm not going to continually post "579" but I will say this. We ran Harris 11 times and Cobb 2 times against SF. Of the 11 carries Harris had 5 on our 2nd offensive possession in the first quarter (TD btw). 4 more in the second Quarter. He ran it twice in the first 3 plays of the second half....we never saw him again. We did run Cobb twice on the drive that tied the game at 24-24.

NOw, from 8+ minutes left in the 3rd quarter how many times do you gather we called a running play in that game. A game where we were running effectively. A game that was tied and then still within a score for awhile?

ZERO. We called all passes. Two consecutive drives we put the D RIGHT back onto the field and they got torched. You want to bitch at dom for not adjusting, the guy didn't even have time to spray on a fresh layer.

You must run the ball effectively. The minute we stopped, Rodgers was running for his life and the game was over. SF didn't do that against atlanta and they came back and won.

[bobblehead]

We've played around with these stats before...

To me, if you want to evaluate the run game more honestly, you have to look at rushing attempts by RB's, and necessarily have to take out QB scrambles and WR runs.

We may have been 16th in rushing attempts, but consider a comparison to San Diego - who has Philip Rivers limping around behind the LOS. They finished 27th in rushing attempts.

Take out their non-RB attempts, i.e. Rivers had 27 atts, and couple of WR's had a few attemts... their RB attempts = 378.

Take out Rodgers scrambles (54), and the other non-RB attempts... and our RB attempts = 365.

To me, the evaluation of the running game is how did your team perform when handing the ball to your principle RB's?? There are teams where you would throw that out, i.e. SF and Wash. most notably - but when we're talking about the running game, we should be talking about how our team performs with our RB's toting the rock.

Our RB's collectively averaged 3.5 yds/carry... take out our non-RB carries, and our rushing attempts relative to the rest of the league drop us quite a bit - and better indicator of the fact that we simply cannot run the football.

Yea, what he said.

[King Friday]

The run game is absolutely necessary. We won the Super Bowl because the running game showed signs of life that teams had to respect during that postseason. We haven't looked the same against elite competition since, because we are completely one-dimensional. It allows defenses to rush Rodgers far too aggressively and was ultimately why the offense seemed to take a step back last year.

We don't need a 2,000 yard rusher. But not having a 500 yard rusher is a complete joke. It is a necessity for this team to protect Rodgers by finding a way to utilize the running game far more effectively in 2013. 3rd and 3 should not be an automatic passing down...even for our elite aerial attack. The sad fact is that 3rd and 1 was a passing down all of last season. Keep that up and the franchise QB will end up in the hospital. That is why a running game IS a necessity. It is not a necessity to have an elite running game, but at least HAVING one is unless we want to continually come up short to more physical teams as the Patriots have proven over the last 3-4 years.

[bobblehead]

From what I hear Sitton doesn't back down to anyone. EDS might be like that too.

Sitton is good, but he isn't a play past the whistle guy. EDS is good at untying shoes and he battles, but is limited physically. Lang is nasty. He enjoys it.

[pbmax]

I'd prefer to look strictly at RB's - and throw out the running QB teams... if you throw out their starting QB stats, their rushing attempts would drop disproportionately.

I would almost throw NE out as well just b/c they're so gimmicky - and I, as should everyone, hate Belichick, lol...

snipped

This list is as close a look at strictly RB carries as you can get unless you are going to do a hand count by roster. And it doesn't count if you do it for the Packers and one other team and say See? PROOF!

This list, which has no Starting QB runs in it (no RGIII, no Wilson, no Luck, no CK), simply doesn't show what you want it to show.

Please remember, my point is not that the Packers running game was good. It wasn't, though it did uptick late in the season with Harris. My point, the post I initially responded to, was that concern about McCarthy's willingness to run is overstated. Its not his preferred method, but he will do it if he thinks he needs to (2012) or can be productive (Grant).

[pbmax]

Yea, what he said.

Problem is, what he said is not what I was trying to argue against. I am responding to concern that McCarthy won't run.

I am not arguing with wist or you that 2012 was a good running game.

Also, you cannot subtract carries from the Packers and the do the same for one other team and claim its meaningful.

[pbmax]

They went with one back and empty backfield formations as part of their game plan versus the Seahawks because they thought they could pass at will on their nickel and dime. Rodgers, despite 8 sacks, was 12/15 for 86 yards and a 90 rating in the first half. McCarthy had it half right. He could pass on them. The part he did not see was being unable to block their pass rush with 5 or six. The Seahawks also probably did a better than anticipated job on the outside with Nelson and Jones.

One of McCarthy's traits is that he sticks with his plan and at times it seems like he does this for too long. He does this for a good reason and that is a panicked mid-half adjustment to the game plan is less likely to be successful that a fully thought out, week long plan. Changing it based on the first few series is risky and it should depend on seeing something you did not anticipate during the week.

The only way to answer this question would be to pump sodium pentathol into the players and coaches and find out whether they simply overrun by superior force or that it a poor game plan matchup with the Hawks. My money is superior force. Was game plan a pipe dream? In retrospect, probably. I am not sure McCarthy came to full grips with their protection problems until after this game. Newhouse at LT was never situated. Saturday was not replaced until more than halfway through the season. And how you anticipate Bryan Bulaga having about his poorest game as a pro is beyond me.

Faced with the evidence you cite, he switched plans and ran in the second half. McCarthy doesn't game plan for balance, he game plans to attack the defense. When he is wrong, he is very wrong. But the price of his miscalculation here was a 7 point deficit. People in the game day thread are always screaming there are no adjustments. this game is proof there are and it was to run more. You could argue that the adjustment should have come in the middle of the first half, but there are sounds reasons to wait til halftime when the deficit is small.

The running plan in the Seahawks game doesn't bother me.


San Fran I am more inclined to agree, even though pressure was less an issue here than 1st half Seattle. Mainly, running would have possibly reduced the number of SF possessions in the second half. Given the fold job the defense was doing, this would directly help.

Shotgun and no huddle hurt the Packers in the second half here. No huddle might have helped produce one score and other than two good Cobb carries, didn't do much else. I will be curious to see of McCarthy sticks with the run if they fall behind to SF again.

[bobblehead]

I partly agree. I am not one who thinks you should abandon the game plan, and I don't think MM fails to adjust. I think he is delusional in what he asks of his OL. In Seattle he didn't run enough to keep the D honest, so YES, I think predicting Bulaga having a terrible game was reasonable.

Like Holmgren, MM prefers to pass. When he is frustrated he doesn't call running plays. You MUST run the ball enough to keep the D honest even if you aren't good at it.

We can argue circles about certain games and what happened, and cite stats, but my lying eyes tell me that MM would rather pass and quite often hangs to OL out to dry by letting an opposing D pin back the ears. I tend to believe my lying eyes.

[pbmax]

When he is frustrated he doesn't call running plays.

This I agree with. I think his normal fall back plan is to pass and attack weakness in the coverage. I think Rodgers fully buys into this, especially deep, which can lead to QB hits.

He has admitted a time or two that he did give up on the run too early. I think overall, his patience with the run game has been demonstrated by both Grant's success and his patience with injury and Harris last year.

But inside a game, he does get away from it. And I don't think he thinks he should HAVE to run just to protect his QB. He asks quite a lot of his line.