Official Week 3 Lions at Packers Game Day Thread

[pbmax]

Defensive players not playing yesterday:

Letroy Guion
Datone Jones
Clay Matthews
Sam Shields
Morgan Burnett

Do you gentlemen think not having these defensive players yesterday contributed to Detroit staying in the game?

Yep. So did Randall's illness.

[Maxie the Taxi]

To be fair, Detroit had three starters and several key backups out with injuries and a couple of walking wounded as well. They'll say that contributed to their defeat. Nobody can know what the outcome would have been if both teams were 100% healthy. It's worthless to speculate.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Defensive players not playing yesterday:

Letroy Guion
Datone Jones
Clay Matthews
Sam Shields
Morgan Burnett

Do you gentlemen think not having these defensive players yesterday contributed to Detroit staying in the game?

We could even add Mike Pennel to the pity party.

But as was pointed out by Maximus, Lions were short handed too.

[texaspackerbacker]

I don't think MM cares whether he wins by 1 or 100 as long as he wins. He seems unconcerned about keeping his foot on the gas vs. counting possessions and figuring out how to bleed the clock, while possibly allowing the other team to make a game of it. Remember the Atlanta game in 2014 amidst a perfect home record? They were owning Atlanta, much like they were owning Detroit by halftime yesterday. Then, they went into a shell in the second half and held on to win in both games, which takes me back to my points. It's a calculated way to win, but can give the fans discomfort at times. They were certainly short-handed, and probably wanted to make sure they didn't sustain any further injury. Is it the best approach? I don't know. They won.

You're probably right ....... and that's an OK thing right up until it isn't. Occasionally, something goes wrong with that "just getting by" approach, and you don't. In other words, rarely, Aaron Rodgers doesn't bail him out from his stupid tendency to be that way.

[Zool]

http://www.pro-football-reference.co...all_vis_drives

Draw your own conclusions from facts.

[texaspackerbacker]

I don't mind running on first down as they often do. Helps set up a second down where pass or run is an option and keeps play action viable. Though they too often start the game with a run. I don't remember the last pass to open a game.

If you gain 7 or 8 yards, maybe, but how often does that happen with this O Line? Even then, likely as not, they will run on second, gain 1 or 2, then run and fail on 3rd and 1. Put the ball in the hands of the Franchise, and let him win it with Pass-First.

[ThunderDan]

If you gain 7 or 8 yards, maybe, but how often does that happen with this O Line? Even then, likely as not, they will run on second, gain 1 or 2, then run and fail on 3rd and 1. Put the ball in the hands of the Franchise, and let him win it with Pass-First.

In the 2nd half our 1st down runs went for 8,7,0,4,2,-1. So that is 50% success rate against a team down multiple scores knowing you are trying to run more and grind clock.

[Patler]

Results of Packers plays on 1st down.

Passes - 0-49-2-0-2-0-5-0-13-0-9
Runs - 3-5-3-(-1)-3-8-7-0-4-2-(-1)

[pbmax]

Results of Packers plays on 1st down.

Passes - 0-49-2-0-2-0-5-0-13-0-9
Runs - 3-5-3-(-1)-3-8-7-0-4-2-(-1)

I am not worried about the first down run. I AM worried about run-run-pass.

That said, the entire argument about passing is in that line. Passing netted 2 first downs and 1 huge change in field position.

Running guaranteed you needed another play to keep possession.

That is not to argue for passing all the time. We have seen what happens to this offense when it goes entirely to the pass and the defense has adjusted. You don't want to increase the number of times you go deep because you must.

But it does demonstrate that a failure to pass dampens offensive output.

Running, assuming moderate success, does help keep ALL your other running and passing options open.

[Maxie the Taxi]

I am not worried about the first down run. I AM worried about run-run-pass.

That said, the entire argument about passing is in that line. Passing netted 2 first downs and 1 huge change in field position.

Running guaranteed you needed another play to keep possession.

That is not to argue for passing all the time. We have seen what happens to this offense when it goes entirely to the pass and the defense has adjusted. You don't want to increase the number of times you go deep because you must.

But it does demonstrate that a failure to pass dampens offensive output.

Running, assuming moderate success, does help keep ALL your other running and passing options open.

To all the football nerds and statisticians out there:

On any particular down, with less than 10 yards to go for a first down, what are the odds of successfully running for the first down vs the odds of successfully passing for the first down?

[pbmax]

(15:00) E.Lacy right end to GB 28 for 3 yards (K.Van Noy).
(13:28) (No Huddle, Shotgun) E.Lacy up the middle to 50 for 5 yards (T.Walker).
(12:12) (No Huddle, Shotgun) A.Rodgers pass incomplete short middle to J.Cook.

(2:45) A.Rodgers pass deep middle to J.Nelson to DET 11 for 49 yards (T.Wilson).
(1:57) E.Lacy left tackle to DET 8 for 3 yards (W.Gilberry).

(:33) T.Montgomery right end to GB 32 for -1 yards (Q.Diggs).

2nd QTR

(14:51) A.Rodgers pass short right to R.Rodgers for 2 yards, TOUCHDOWN.

(11:40) (Shotgun) A.Rodgers pass incomplete deep middle to J.Cook. GB-J.Cook was injured during the play.

Penalty wiped out completion to Ripper
(4:37) A.Rodgers pass incomplete short right to E.Lacy.
(4:03) (No Huddle) E.Lacy right end to DET 34 for 3 yards (W.Gilberry; T.Whitehead).
(2:54) A.Rodgers pass short right to J.Nelson to DET 20 for 5 yards (D.Slay).

(:32) (Shotgun) A.Rodgers pass incomplete deep left to R.Rodgers.

Half

(8:23) E.Lacy left tackle to GB 33 for 8 yards (T.Whitehead, T.Walker).
(7:07) (No Huddle) E.Lacy right end to GB 46 for 7 yards (G.Quin).
(5:58) (No Huddle, Shotgun) A.Rodgers pass short left to J.Perillo to DET 32 for 13 yards (G.Quin).
(5:23) (No Huddle) E.Lacy left end to DET 32 for no gain (Z.Gooden, N.Lawson).

4th QTR

(12:27) E.Lacy right tackle to GB 32 for 4 yards (A.Zettel; Z.Gooden).
(11:01) E.Lacy right end to GB 48 for 2 yards (K.Hyder).

(6:35) A.Rodgers pass incomplete short left to T.Davis. (loved this call after short series, best sign of 2nd half)

(3:34) E.Lacy up the middle to GB 24 for -1 yards (A.Robinson).
(2:30) (Shotgun) A.Rodgers pass short left to D.Adams to GB 47 for 9 yards (N.Lawson). (second best call of half, especially after a drop by the DA)
(2:00) A.Rodgers kneels to DET 45 for -1 yards.

Ignoring the kneel down, I get 11 runs and 10 throws. Might have missed one.

[hoosier]

Results of Packers plays on 1st down.

Passes - 0-49-2-0-2-0-5-0-13-0-9
Runs - 3-5-3-(-1)-3-8-7-0-4-2-(-1)

That passing line is a little incredible: even on a day when Rodgers's performance said "We're back!" his first-down passing efficiency still leaves a lot to be desired. For argument's sake let's say that anything less than four yards on first down is a failure. Seven out of 11 first down passes were objective fails, one was a near fail, and only three were objective successes. The eleven first down run plays were just as bad or worse in terms of number of objective successes, but many of the nominal failures still kept the down-and-distance reasonable. The answer isn't pass more or get out of the tendency to run on first and second downs, it's that the Packers need to find a way to increase their overall first-down efficiency.

[hoosier]

To all the football nerds and statisticians out there:

On any particular down, with less than 10 yards to go for a first down, what are the odds of successfully running for the first down vs the odds of successfully passing for the first down?

In the absence of any more specific information the only possible answer is 50:50: either you make it or you don't.

[hoosier]

That passing line is a little incredible: even on a day when Rodgers's performance said "We're back!" his first-down passing efficiency still leaves a lot to be desired. For argument's sake let's say that anything less than four yards on first down is a failure. Seven out of 11 first down passes were objective fails, one was a near fail, and only three were objective successes. The eleven first down run plays were just as bad or worse in terms of number of objective successes, but many of the nominal failures still kept the down-and-distance reasonable. The answer isn't pass more or get out of the tendency to run on first and second downs, it's that the Packers need to find a way to increase their overall first-down efficiency.

Ok, so one of the short passes was an objective success (2 yard TD) and another fail (incomplete) was mitigated by circumstances (stuck deep in their own end with 32 seconds remaining in half). And it looks like our resident nerd erroneously duplicated the 2-0 line at the end of the first part of the series, leaving us with nine first-down passing attempts, of which four were objective fails and four objective wins and one (the five-yarder) an ok result. That is getting better but still doesn't rise much above average.

[pbmax]

Results of Packers plays on 1st down.

Passes - 0-49-2-0-2-0-5-0-13-0-9
Runs - 3-5-3-(-1)-3-8-7-0-4-2-(-1)

OK, you are counting the 2 yard pass to Ripper that was nullified by penalty. Now the numbers match.