Harry Sydney throws some darts at MM

[esoxx]

Alex Gibbs.

This version is a mere shadow of that system. I suspect they will junk it this offseason.

[RashanGary]

Re: Harry Sydney throws some darts at MM

They gained over 100 yards rushing the first half. Second half goes: 6, 3, -3, 5 and 0. Because of the two plays, -3 and 0, you should abandon what gained over 100 yards the first half and 14 yards on the other 3 plays of the second half? That makes no sense at that point. That's like giving up on the passing game because of a couple interceptions.
.

The Packers were the worst running team in the NFL after 4 games by a large margin. I think they still are by a smaller margin. That isn't a couple of bad luck plays. That is pretty consistant.

He might have thought that he could run the ball against Chicago after what happened in the first half, but what happened in the first half might never have happened at all if the Bears weren't so affraid of the pass.

Do you think the Packers should come out and try to run as often as they pass like they did in the first 4 series of the 2nd half?

MM has a slight excuse by thinking maybe he could do it after the 1st half, but I don't think that excuse will last much longer if he continues to bang his head against the wall going forward.

[Patler]

Re: Harry Sydney throws some darts at MM

They gained over 100 yards rushing the first half. Second half goes: 6, 3, -3, 5 and 0. Because of the two plays, -3 and 0, you should abandon what gained over 100 yards the first half and 14 yards on the other 3 plays of the second half? That makes no sense at that point. That's like giving up on the passing game because of a couple interceptions.
.

The Packers were the worst running team in the NFL after 4 games by a large margin. I think they still are by a smaller margin. That isn't a couple of bad luck plays. That is pretty consistant.

He might have thought that he could run the ball against Chicago after what happened in the first half, but what happened in the first half might never have happened at all if the Bears weren't so affraid of the pass.

Do you think the Packers should come out and try to run as often as they pass like they did in the first 4 series of the 2nd half?

MM has a slight excuse by thinking maybe he could do it after the 1st half, but I don't think that excuse will last much longer if he continues to bang his head against the wall going forward.

But it's kind of "chicken or the egg" question too. He admitted a couple games he didn't even try to run the ball. The backs had only 14 carries against the Vikings, and only 11 against the Chargers.

You can't gain yards if you don't have carries; but....
You don't get carries if you don't gain the yards.

This is supposed to be a sort of "wear them out" running game. MM has always said the big gains should come at the end of the game, as 1 or 2 yard gains in the first half become 3 and 4 yard gains in the second half, and the 3-5 yard gains of the first half break for long runs in the second half.

He has always stressed the need for patience in a game for the running attack, but has never really shown any, either. Which leads me to believe he really has no confidence in their ability to run it correctly.

[RashanGary]

Re: Harry Sydney throws some darts at MM

He has always stressed the need for patience in a game for the running attack, but has never really shown any, either. Which leads me to believe he really has no confidence in their ability to run it correctly.

I agree. He seemed to have thought maybe they had it figured out after the 1st half, but now it looks liek that was not the case. I'd say the logical approach is to continue to pass to set up the run and to come up with a better long term approach to fix the run game. The Packers are a pretty good team. They don't have to run the ball to win, but they will have to run the ball if they want to take the next step. Right now I think a coach should just do what you can to win, but in the long term, he's going to have to find a real solution to the problem.

[Bretsky]

Re: Harry Sydney throws some darts at MM

They gained over 100 yards rushing the first half. Second half goes: 6, 3, -3, 5 and 0. Because of the two plays, -3 and 0, you should abandon what gained over 100 yards the first half and 14 yards on the other 3 plays of the second half? That makes no sense at that point. That's like giving up on the passing game because of a couple interceptions.
.

The Packers were the worst running team in the NFL after 4 games by a large margin. I think they still are by a smaller margin. That isn't a couple of bad luck plays. That is pretty consistant.

He might have thought that he could run the ball against Chicago after what happened in the first half, but what happened in the first half might never have happened at all if the Bears weren't so affraid of the pass.

Do you think the Packers should come out and try to run as often as they pass like they did in the first 4 series of the 2nd half?

MM has a slight excuse by thinking maybe he could do it after the 1st half, but I don't think that excuse will last much longer if he continues to bang his head against the wall going forward.

But it's kind of "chicken or the egg" question too. He admitted a couple games he didn't even try to run the ball. The backs had only 14 carries against the Vikings, and only 11 against the Chargers.

You can't gain yards if you don't have carries; but....
You don't get carries if you don't gain the yards.

This is supposed to be a sort of "wear them out" running game. MM has always said the big gains should come at the end of the game, as 1 or 2 yard gains in the first half become 3 and 4 yard gains in the second half, and the 3-5 yard gains of the first half break for long runs in the second half.

He has always stressed the need for patience in a game for the running attack, but has never really shown any, either. Which leads me to believe he really has no confidence in their ability to run it correctly.

I have a hard time thinking our OL is going to wear anybody down; if anything they may get worn down.

It was a good thing MM made no effort to run against SD and MN; I think he was surprised in his success against the Bears....just my gut

And then he started believing

[Patler]

Re: Harry Sydney throws some darts at MM

I have a hard time thinking our OL is going to wear anybody down; if anything they may get worn down.

The "wearing down" is actually supposed to come from having cut the players time and time again. These big guys don't like being knocked down time and time again.
It is supposed to make them slower, less reactive to the plays.

[Rastak]

Harry is quite the egomaniac. Apparently, he's one of these guys that thinks you can only know the game if you played in the NFL. Football isn't that complicated.

Actually it is. I wish I understood half of what goes into player assignments, reads and how to formulate a game plan.

[Rastak]

At least this gives us something to debate about

I don't blame MM for this loss; but I do think the playcalling had a big factor in this loss.

Turnovers and penalites are blatantly obvious.
I'm on the fence with the special teams and kicking away from Hester.

But GB's offense never even remotely got into a rhythym in the second half.
I'm not of the view that this team will consistently run over four quarters unless we are playing a powder puff defense (maybe Detroit).

As I sat and watched the game I could feel it slipping away on offense; the Skin would be a good witness to that. My thoughts here were being expressed as I sat and watched the game.

After attacking in half one, we did little of that in half two.

Tomorrow will be interesting; now it's time to go down and feel the current pain of being a Badger fan.

Oh cry me a river! Try being a Gopher fan!

[RashanGary]

You know what was the most uninspiring thing that I heard all off season? I'm going to say it anyway


I remember after a preseason game, one of the lineman was asked about cutting. He said that it just creates a log jam and they were not going to do much cutting anymore.

It was absolutely baffling to me. The zone scheme has been successfull one way for a long, long time and now they are not going to run it that way because they think they have the asnwers. I acctually got pretty riled up at that point because I thought that they had no clue what they were doing.

[esoxx]

It was absolutely baffling to me. The zone scheme has been successfull one way for a long, long time and now they are not going to run it that way because they think they have the asnwers. I acctually got pretty riled up at that point because I thought that they had no clue what they were doing.

Agree totally. Either run it the Gibbs way or junk it. The key is really cutting on every run play to get those big boys on the ground. That's how you wear out a D-line (see Super Bowl XXXII).

Gibbs went to Atlanta and installed it. Jags learned under the Master.

They seem to be lost now. The fact that they couldn't get on Briggs and basically let him dominate speaks volumes.

[Maxie the Taxi]

This is a very interesting thread. After all is said and done, I tend to come down on the side against MM.

Relative to the rest of the league, the Bears are much better defending the run than the pass. The fact that our run game had the Bears on their heels in the first half of the game should have no bearing on what we should do during the second half.

As someone said, in the first half we had momentum (whatever that is). In the second half, the Bears had gained momenum. You don't gain momentum back by running the ball for 3 or 4 yards. What the Packers do best is pass and they should have stuck to it virtually exclusively in the second half.

In fact, I'll define momentum. I think it's the feeling that you get when you're playing to win rather than playing not to lose. The Bears had the Packers on their heels the 2nd half and we should have unleashed the strongest part of our offense -- the pass offense -- on every play in an attempt to score TD's and win rather than just wind down the clock and win.

That said, I agree playcalling wasn't the thing that beat us. Turnovers and penalties beat us. However, playcalling could have won it for us if we hadn't have saved our best asset for the last two minutes of play.

[gbgary]

I don't think its justified to rip into M3 for only getting on the rookie. M3 has shown that veteran's are not immune to criticism. He's ripped into the veterans when he feels they aren't showing focus. Jones' case was different than Favre's and Woodsen's. Jones made the exact same mistake on basically back to back plays. I agree that he shouldn't have been benched as long as he was, however the short ass chewing was not out of line.

I THINK IT'S JUSTIFIED TO RIP INTO MM!!! jj's mistakes were good plays made by the defense, not bad decision making like brett's throw or MACARTHY'S IDIOTIC IDEA TO BENCH JJ, AND HIS STUPID PLAY CALLING (run run run punt) IN THE SECOND HALF. i agree TOTALLY with mr. sydney.

[gbgary]

I remember after a preseason game, one of the lineman was asked about cutting. He said that it just creates a log jam and they were not going to do much cutting anymore.

if that's true then that's another reason MM needs his ass kicked. besides the loss of green (ted :\) no wonder the running game is looking so horrible compared to last year.