For those worried about our running game

Cdnfavrefan

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 26, 2006
Messages
1,624
Reaction score
0
Location
the unknown province
I was looking through a gameprogram from the 96 SB and found something interesting that gives me a little hope our running game can be fixed in midseason. In 96 after week 13 we averaged only 105 yards a game (16th) and had only 3 running scores. As the weather turned though in the last 6 games before the SB they averaged 152 yards a game and 9 rushing scores. It said the improvement was mainly due to an insired offensive line and a simplified running game.
It's great if we can keep winning on Brett's arm but it's also encouraging to see things can be improved when needed instead of waiting for next year. Let's just hope the end result is the same :pop:
 
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
7,033
Reaction score
0
Location
Toronto, Canada
When did we have a better line? 96 or now?

You know our O-line has also lacked consistency personnel wise this year...

There are a lot of reasons we should improve our running game: one RB to get bulk of carries, more stability in our o-line rotation, coaches stressing home run blocking nuances, continued improvement of Hall, and better chemistry among QB/RB/O-Line/FB.

The general point I think Cdnfavrefan is making is that it isn't time to panic, even if we don't have a 100 yard rusher/total rushing yards this week against the Chiefs.
 

tromadz

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 16, 2005
Messages
999
Reaction score
3
Location
Chicago
im not worried about the run game.

you wanna be worried about something? be worried about superaids.
 
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
7,033
Reaction score
0
Location
Toronto, Canada
^ Or rats.


But another point: Grant is a first year player (not a rookie, but this is still his first year as a member of a 53 man roster, so technically he is a first year player) that has been in our system for about 8 weeks. There is no way he's mastered our offense yet, so Grant will continue to improve from that standpoint as well.
 

Greg C.

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 1, 2005
Messages
2,856
Reaction score
0
Location
Marquette, Michigan
I remember how that O-line in '96 came together toward the end of the season and started to dominate. Before that they had been fairly average. They were anchored by a good, tough veteran at center, Frank Winters, and then there were three talented younger players: guards Adam Timmerman and Aaron Taylor and right tackle Earl Dotson. But they had some problems at left tackle during the first half of the season, with Ken Ruettgers trying unsuccessfully to come back from an injury and first-round rookie bust Jon Michels failing to get the job done. What really solidified the line was when an old journeyman player, Bruce Wilkerson, stepped in at left tackle and played great. I've always considered him to be the unsung hero of the Super Bowl team.

Our current O-line is probably just as good in pass protection as that one, if not better, but not nearly as good at run blocking. But run blocking is such a chemistry thing that I'm hoping things will somehow gel like they did for that '96 team.
 

cheesey

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 25, 2005
Messages
1,000
Reaction score
3
Location
Wisconsin
As long as we are winning, THAT is what matters. If we have a guy run for 150 yards and we lose, that would make our run stats better. But would give us a "L". Yes, i hope we can get the running game going soon. But i also hope we don't quit doing what works to try to make a running game. I have seen that from past coaches. They want to push the run so bad, that it ends up costing games.
 

dhpackr

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 14, 2005
Messages
1,635
Reaction score
0
Location
SE Wisconsin
bozz_2006 said:
Jackson would probably be back in the lineup and get a few carries,

Well I hope Brandon does something w/the opportunity, or eventually he may get a certain label.
 
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
7,033
Reaction score
0
Location
Toronto, Canada
I thought I read that Mo would be the back-up with B-Jack becoming the third down back.

Since B-Jack has shown something in the passing game, such a move would make sense. I know a lot of reporters have talked about B-Jack being weak in pass protection, but so far in the games that he has played he's been solid.

The only mistake by B-Jack that led to a problem was when B-Jack was out of position and couldn't get a strong enough block in the Eagles game on the play where Favre threw an INT on a pass intended for Franks.

I think Favre has said there was miscommunication between him and Franks, so the INT can be attributed to that more-so than B-Jack's breakdown.

Otherwise, B-Jack has done what he was supposed to in pass pro, which would lead me to believe word of his short falling in that area has been exaggerated.
 
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
7,033
Reaction score
0
Location
Toronto, Canada
Not sure. Reading B-Jack's interview from Friday, it seem like he has been told what his role will be with the team, but he wasn't exactly forthcoming in explicitly saying "I will be a third down back or the back-up".
 
OP
OP
C

Cdnfavrefan

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 26, 2006
Messages
1,624
Reaction score
0
Location
the unknown province
Fine by me. So far if he's our starter that could be bad news. At least he can't say he wasn't given a chance. Not like I'm giving up on him I just think he may be a project in progress
 

cheesey

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 25, 2005
Messages
1,000
Reaction score
3
Location
Wisconsin
Thats the problem when a rookie is thrown into the fire. Some guys can't handle it right away. Now that he's had some time off, he may not feuch pressure and might perform better.
 

Zombieslayer

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 13, 2006
Messages
4,338
Reaction score
0
Location
CA
im not worried about the run game.

you wanna be worried about something? be worried about superaids.

Superaids is highly unlikely. It's currently a theory, if AIDS can be transmitted by something other than blood. Currently, the virus that causes AIDS is very weak and dies within a minute of being exposed to air. I don't see it happening, and most scientists don't either.

Now, if you really want to worry about something, worry about the upcoming zombie plague.

As for our running game, it will be fine. We found our RB. I have a feeling next year, we'll have Grant, Wynn, and Morency in that order, and we'll dump B-Jack and we might pick up someone else or we might not.
 

Zombieslayer

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 13, 2006
Messages
4,338
Reaction score
0
Location
CA
bozz_2006 said:
Jackson would probably be back in the lineup and get a few carries,

Well I hope Brandon does something w/the opportunity, or eventually he may get a certain label.

DH - I have a feeling he'll get that certain label.

However, I'm happy with Grant. If Wynn stays healthy, we'll have 2 good backs. That's the big "if" I'm concerned about.
 

yourout

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 20, 2005
Messages
352
Reaction score
0
I am more worried about the Oline. We are average at best.

Need to upgrade it next year.
 

Zombieslayer

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 13, 2006
Messages
4,338
Reaction score
0
Location
CA
I am more worried about the Oline. We are average at best.

Need to upgrade it next year.

Agreed. I think Grant and Wynn are good RBs, but our OL isn't opening up holes for them. Grant had only 55 yards today on 19 carries because he was fighting tooth and nail for each yard. I only saw 2 or 3 holes the whole game.
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top