More Banjo: Week 3 vs Lions

[red]

Just was looking at the box score on NFL.com. Two other notes, Packer offense had 1 three and out the whole game. ARod had 205 yards passing.

yes, and he had 174 of those at halftime

so 31 yards on 4 drives in the second half

[Rutnstrut]

Not sure what to think after the game. I just finished watching it on tape after having to miss the game live.

I am not sure how you can complain about the O in the 2nd half. I think we only had 4 possessions in the 2nd half. We scored on 1, punted twice and run out the last 4 minutes of the game without giving Det a chance to tie the game.

If I remember correctly we had 10 total possessions. We scored on 6, punted 2, run 2 plays to finish the 1st half, and ran out the last 4 minutes of the 2nd half sealing the game making sure DET never had the ball when they were only behind by 1 score or less.

The 2nd half "struggles" occurred because DET had some sustained long scoring drives.

It's easy to complain. Had they been playing a decent team. Stubby's foot of the gas approach would have been a losing one.

[Joemailman]

Lacy had 17 carries. 6 in the first half when they forgot about the running the football more and had four straight scoring drives. In the second half, they gave him 11 carries and had one scoring drive. On their sole scoring drive, they gave him the ball 5 times, threw twice and had Rodgers scramble twice.

EDIT: Most likely, that's four called pass plays.

It was a good drive killed by a penalty. But that happens more often when you run.

My evidence of foot off the gas is first downs by half: 1-8-2 (run-pass-penalty) for a total of 11 in the first half. Second half? 1-5-0 for six total.

The offense disappeared on the scoreboard, field position and first downs when they ran more. The defense needed more help than just bleeding time.

It was a good drive killed by a penalty on an attempted pass play. The fact that Rodgers had to twice pull the ball down and run on that drive might indicate that the Lions and had made some defensive adjustments, and what had worked so splendidly in the 1st half wasn't working as well now.

The main difference between 1-8-2 and 1-5-0 may have been the fact that the Lions had some long scoring drives in the second half. I understand the frustration people have. But I wonder how many coaches with a 21 point half time lead and a defense minus 5 starters wouldn't have tried to run the ball.

[ThunderDan]

So I went through the play calls in the 2nd half for the Packers. We ran 28 total plays. 3 were punts and field goals and the last 3 were kneel downs by ARod.

That leaves 22 "real" plays in the 2nd half. We ran 12 times and passed 10 if you count ARod's scrambles as pass plays. So we had 55/45 run/pass mix not as unbalanced as many here felt.

[ThunderDan]

We ran 30 plays in the 1st half. 1 FG, 21 passes and 8 runs. First half mix 28/72 run/pass mix.

This is probably why the 2nd half seemed so run heavy.

TOP by half

11:33 - 13:20 total 24:53.

[Maxie the Taxi]

The start of the second half had a definite, different feel to it than the start of the 1st half. The emphasis at the beginning of the 1st half was an aggressive passing attack. Pass first to set up the run, Tex would say.

At the start of the second half the emphasis was on Lacy pounding the pill. We were leading 31-10 at half-time, so Stubby coming out with a conservative plan to run more in the second half (take his foot off the gas) is kind of conventional wisdom. I didn't mind it.

But when Detroit started moving the ball/scoring and the running game stalled due to zero rushing yardage on 1st down and penalties, I felt we should have gone back to the aggressive passing attack, especially in the 4th quarter and especially at the end of the game.

Like someone said (pbmax, I think) it isn't a sound plan to rely on Arod to scramble on third down for 10 yards for a much needed 1st down in those situations.

[ThunderDan]

On our 12 "real" runs in the 2nd half we gained 60 yards. That averages to 5 ypc.

[King Friday]

So I went through the play calls in the 2nd half for the Packers. We ran 28 total plays. 3 were punts and field goals and the last 3 were kneel downs by ARod.

That leaves 22 "real" plays in the 2nd half. We ran 12 times and passed 10 if you count ARod's scrambles as pass plays. So we had 55/45 run/pass mix not as unbalanced as many here felt.

Not sure on anyone else, but I'm not really talking about the run/pass mix. I'm talking about the aggressiveness of the play calling. You can call 100% pass plays and still be a conservative offense. You can run the ball 75% of the time and still be an aggressive offense.

You don't want to become PREDICTABLE. Out of 10 first down plays in the 2nd half, we ran on 7 of them. 2 of the 3 passes were out of the shotgun formation. So, in general, the defense knew that if we weren't in shotgun, we were running it. That is too predictable for me in a game that had not yet been decided. McCarthy seemed to call the offense in the second half as if it were decided...something he has done before, occasionally to the detriment of the team.

I'm fine with 7 of 10 plays being run plays...if the pass plays look the same at the line of scrimmage and are keeping the defense honest. Run a couple play action plays and go for the dagger, if you will. But the Packer offense mostly went in to a shell, hoping to run off enough time to hold on for the win.

[Maxie the Taxi]

On our 12 "real" runs in the 2nd half we gained 60 yards. That averages to 5 ypc.

Averages don't really matter much. Situations matter. When you run on 1st down, or first and second down and gain no yards or 2 yards in a "must get a 1st down situation," you are then forced to throw the ball on third down (maybe even 2nd down) and everyone knows it.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Not sure on anyone else, but I'm not really talking about the run/pass mix. I'm talking about the aggressiveness of the play calling. You can call 100% pass plays and still be a conservative offense. You can run the ball 75% of the time and still be an aggressive offense.

You don't want to become PREDICTABLE. Out of 10 first down plays in the 2nd half, we ran on 7 of them. 2 of the 3 passes were out of the shotgun formation. So, in general, the defense knew that if we weren't in shotgun, we were running it. That is too predictable for me in a game that had not yet been decided. McCarthy seemed to call the offense in the second half as if it were decided...something he has done before, occasionally to the detriment of the team.

I pretty much agree. I think Stubby thought the game was well in hand (heck, I did too), so he came out conservative instead of aggressive in the second half. When the Lions started to move the ball and score, Stubby was taken by surprise...I was too. Maybe it's tough to go aggressive for a half, dial it back and then try to dial it up again when the situation gets tense.

[pbmax]

I pretty much agree. I think Stubby thought the game was well in hand (heck, I did too), so he came out conservative instead of aggressive in the second half. When the Lions started to move the ball and score, Stubby was taken by surprise...I was too. Maybe it's tough to go aggressive for a half, dial it back and then try to dial it up again when the situation gets tense.

He has gotten slightly less stubborn. After Rodgers darted for a first on 3rd and long. He came right back with a play action throw.

He is still very early with the switch in play calling.

[pbmax]

I think my jinxing powers have retreated as Stafford wasn't disabled by Perry at all today.

So I feel more confident in noting that I haven't had much cause to be mad at Lane Taylor save for one penalty I think. Anyone else?

[Patler]

... I haven't had much cause to be mad at Lane Taylor save for one penalty I think. Anyone else?

I tend to forget that the starting LG is new, and not Josh Sitton. That is a good thing.

[Smidgeon]

Hyde, Randall, and the rest of the secondary had awful games

The Packers secondary usually has a terrible game against Stafford.

[Smidgeon]

Just finished watching on Game Pass. Here are my thoughts:

Charles Davis may know a lot about football, but he knows nothing about broadcasting and got several facts wrong. My football IQ got worse listening to him. Makes me miss Madden who had a gift for saying things simply enough they sounded dumb but were actually teaching you about the game.

Nick Perry earned consistent double teams by the fourth quarter. He and Daniels were consistently keyed in on by the Lions O-line. I know we discussed Perry vs Neal ad nauseum, but I think there's no doubt Perry was the better choice.

I think James Starks is done. He's been a good change of pace back since 2010, but I think he's pretty much given everything he can with nothing left.

Blood and Guts--aka Blake and Jake--don't really strike me as star power guys. I don't look at them like they have a chance to be anywhere near special. In fact, they both play like they're eminently replaceable. BUT (and that's a big but) they are always in the right spot, making the right tackle, at the right time. No broken plays, no missteps, no mental errors. They're the epitome of a "lunch pail linebacker" who just shows up every day and gets the job done. I think we'll forget about them for a long time, except when we consciously remind ourselves "hey, they STILL haven't screwed up".

Damarius Randall will be fine. He's still young. Shields was supposed to be Man #1 back there. But without Shields, without Burnett, Randall is being asked to be Man #1. I think he'll get there one day. But right now, I just hope it doesn't wreck his confidence. He had another bad game, but I don't think he's a bad player.