1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member! Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!

Why worry about the running game?

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by tromadz, Oct 2, 2007.

  1. tromadz
    Offline

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Location:
    Chicago
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0
    So far this year the gameplans have been for Brett and his WRs to abuse questionable secondaries.

    It has worked.

    I understand our teams rushing yards and rushing average is bad, but we don't even try. So why worry?

    week 1: 17 total rush attempts (one by favre)
    week 2: 29 total rush attempts (two by favre)
    week 3: 13 total rush attempts (two by favre)
    week 4: 20 total rush attempts (one by jon ryan, one by driver, four by favre)

    With those attempts, are we really expected to be in the top half of rushing yards, and rushing average?

    11 of the above runs were rushed for 1st downs. Good strategic use of the run game, and not running for the sake of running.

    Why run if it won't do well? Why run when you face a top 10 run defense? Why force the issue with young and injured backs when you have a hall of fame QB? Why run when you can pass with ease?

    WHY WORRY?

    I would be worried if we TRIED to run a lot and failed. Then I would be scared, nervous, and hoping it improved.

    Now I'm NOT saying the running game is awesome, and just hasn't had a shot to show off yet. I'm saying we should wait till we actually have a game where a running back has more than 20 solo rush attempts. How many times has that happened this year? NONE!

    Let's see what happens when we face a bad rush D.

    Let's see what happens when the passing game is taken away and we HAVE to run.

    Till then, why worry?

    This is basically the same O-line as last year. Ahman had over 1000 yards and Morency had a 4.6 average.

    Green Bay is using short passes as substitutions for runs, and you know what? They're working. And you know what else? I'd rather put my trust in Favre\Driver than Ryan Grant.

    The Denver Broncos(week 8 opponent) has one of the WORST running defenses in the league(yards and average). THAT is a game to look at. Judge the running game off THAT game, not when we face top 10 running defenses, which is what the Eagles and Giants are(Chicago is 11th).

    Week 8. That's the game to judge. They have a bad running D and a good passing D. Till then, we play teams with BAD passing D's and GOOD running D's.

    Till then, why worry? Let our running backs get experience and healthy, and let Brett Favre and his pals make opposing pass defenses look like a joke.
  2. Green_Bay_Packers
    Offline

    Green_Bay_Packers Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2007
    Messages:
    5,629
    Location:
    Blackburn, England, United Kingdom
    Ratings:
    +109 / 1 / -0
    Wynn had 600 rushing yards for the Gators last year i think i'm not worried i think he will do good when he is given a chance.
  3. dhpackr
    Offline

    dhpackr Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,635
    Location:
    SE Wisconsin
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    i am worried b/c i just do not feel we can run. i feel we are in a bit of an identity crisis when it comes to therunning attack.

    Colledge, Tauch, Clifton are drive blockers, not cut blockers. right now, the packers are a west coast offense, and the ZBS should be trashed.

    i would like to see Moll, or spitz given an opportunity over Colledge. Colledge is really struggling when it comes to cut blocking in the ZBS. I feel he would be a better T than G.

    i disagree with the statement we do not run the ball b/c we do not try enough.

    i feel we do not run b/c our coach has no faith in his o line to execute cut blocks and open running lanes.

    to say, we will only call running plays against teams that are poor against the run does not really hold up for me b/c to win, you need to run against the good teams that can stop the run as well.
  4. agopackgo4
    Offline

    agopackgo4 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2005
    Messages:
    1,365
    Location:
    Wausau WI
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Care to explain what happens when the temp dips below freezing and it is hard to grip the ball for Favre?
  5. tromadz
    Offline

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Location:
    Chicago
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0
    1. Favre doesn't fall apart in cold weather.
    2. Sure, we'll have to run it better during those games.
    3. In cold weather with bad footing, it's easier for the offensive guys than defensive guys.
    4. How many below freezing games were there last year? How many do you think there will be this year?
    5. Devin Hester is a son of a bitch.

    edit - If you were talking to Dhpackr, then my bad. Ignore is actually working!!!!!! YAY!

    But yeah, I still stand by my words. I think the running game will have to produce in those games.
  6. Zero2Cool
    Offline

    Zero2Cool Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    11,902
    Location:
    Green Bay, WI
    Ratings:
    +7 / 1 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    1989
    Isn't Brett something like 39 - 2 when the temp is below freezing at Lambeau?
  7. dhpackr
    Offline

    dhpackr Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,635
    Location:
    SE Wisconsin
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    did he have a running game in any of those wins???
  8. Zero2Cool
    Offline

    Zero2Cool Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    11,902
    Location:
    Green Bay, WI
    Ratings:
    +7 / 1 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    1989
    Why don't you do something called ... research and come back with an educated response. :)
  9. digsthepack
    Offline

    digsthepack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    2,486
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    I think this is, in part, a conscious decision by MM to be so pass heavy in the early going.

    Short of the Giants, all of the teams we have faced thus far have a very strong run defense. With young backs and a line that is coming together, why force feed to the opponents' strength? A bonus of this philosophy is that we get our young receivers ample connections, and develop the chemistry with Favre that is needed throughout the season....and the post-season.

    I believe that we will witness a more concerted effort in the coming weeks to get our running game on track. As trom noted earlier...this is a line that allowed for a 1000 yard runner last year, and they are most certainly better this year. The next 4 - 5 games should be telling.

    But, personally, I like that MM is not so rigid as to force the run when it is not working...do what is working, take the win, and continue to work on the run game.
  10. dhpackr
    Offline

    dhpackr Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,635
    Location:
    SE Wisconsin
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    I'd expect nothing less from you. do not prove your point, just hurl an insult and duck the question.
    classic for pf.com
  11. Zero2Cool
    Offline

    Zero2Cool Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    11,902
    Location:
    Green Bay, WI
    Ratings:
    +7 / 1 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    1989
    I asked a question. I wasnt insulting you and if took that as an insult, my friend, get some thicker skin.

    Seriously, do some research on those games and educate us on it.
  12. dhpackr
    Offline

    dhpackr Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,635
    Location:
    SE Wisconsin
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    i know the answer, yes we had a running game, now we do not. i am concerned. you are not. simple.
  13. tromadz
    Offline

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Location:
    Chicago
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0
    another thread Dhpackr-jacked.

    thanks.
  14. Pack93z
    Offline

    Pack93z You retired too? .... Not me. I'm in my prime

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2005
    Messages:
    4,855
    Location:
    Central Wisconsin
    Ratings:
    +22 / 0 / -0
    No worries... another running game thread will appear...
  15. dhpackr
    Offline

    dhpackr Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,635
    Location:
    SE Wisconsin
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    you could try a new concept.

    repond to the post, and prove your point with something revolving around football.

    do not call names, do not come up with a one line statement that no one can figure out, just prove your point with some thoughts about football.

    just try it once!
  16. Green_Bay_Packers
    Offline

    Green_Bay_Packers Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2007
    Messages:
    5,629
    Location:
    Blackburn, England, United Kingdom
    Ratings:
    +109 / 1 / -0
    LOL CAT FIGHT LOL
  17. dhpackr
    Offline

    dhpackr Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,635
    Location:
    SE Wisconsin
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    another brilliant post by a pf.com member

    i do not want to fight. a poster starts a thread about the running game. he says we are not running because we have not tried.

    i say , we do not run b/c we have lost our identity as a running team. our starting G and both T are drive blockers, not cut blockers. therefore the running lanes are not there.

    i ask him to prove his point. do not call names, do not come up with a one line post no one understands, just talk football.

    he responds, i high-jacked his thread.
    i do not get it.
  18. Green_Bay_Packers
    Offline

    Green_Bay_Packers Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2007
    Messages:
    5,629
    Location:
    Blackburn, England, United Kingdom
    Ratings:
    +109 / 1 / -0

    See i can make some great posts LOL
  19. tromadz
    Offline

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Location:
    Chicago
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0
    Read my original post. The answers to your questions are there.
  20. Zero2Cool
    Offline

    Zero2Cool Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    11,902
    Location:
    Green Bay, WI
    Ratings:
    +7 / 1 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    1989
    No offense, but I don't trust you as far as I could throw the whole city of Green Bay.

    Got links?
    I'm really curious to what our running game was. I know it was better than what we have now, but just curious. I'd normally do the research, but you're the one questioning it and I want to see if you are capable of dredging up such information ... or ... if you just simply throw out your opinion and leave it at that.
  21. KGB94SACKEM
    Offline

    KGB94SACKEM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2007
    Messages:
    334
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    First off, with all due respect, this is full of all sorts of contradicting things.

    Tromadz, if you are not worried about the running game, that is fine. However, alot of us are and your reasoning does nothing but deflect from the problem. You say that you would rather trust Brett Favre with the ball than one of the RB's, however I remember you saying in a previous thread that the ball in Favre hands was no longer a good idea.

    You go on to say that we should ignore the stats against good rushing defenses and look at week 8 when we play a bad rushing defense. That's like saying ignore how we play against good teams and just go by what we do against the bad ones.


    You judge a team from what it does every game. I like to think that really great teams go into a game and do what they do, no matter if the run/pass defense is bad or not. Teams play THIER game. Right now our game is passing alot, which is fine, as long as it's working. However, we will have to line up and run the ball soon enough, no matter who we are playing, and we must be able to do it. They are trying now and they are having no success. The RB's are just not good enough and the O-Line is obviously not picking up the ZBS.


    The concerns are valid
  22. KGB94SACKEM
    Offline

    KGB94SACKEM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2007
    Messages:
    334
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Which is what a forum is all about
  23. IronMan
    Offline

    IronMan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2006
    Messages:
    3,087
    Location:
    Springfield, MO
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0
    I agree with Trom, and think we will be fine. I didnt like the play calling, but if we keep winning, theres really nothing to complain about. And I really just wanted to reply so I could add another box to this reply. :p
  24. Zero2Cool
    Offline

    Zero2Cool Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    11,902
    Location:
    Green Bay, WI
    Ratings:
    +7 / 1 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    1989
    I wonder, do you know that you are proving my point?

    Someone states something and someone else asks for facts to back it up. Yes, that is what a forum is about. Especially when someone just throws opinions around as fact, expect them to be called upon to provide something to support it.

    It's really a great cycle if used properly.
  25. tromadz
    Offline

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Location:
    Chicago
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0
    1. I did not say to IGNORE anything.
    2. The reasoning I listed (we don't run often, we played good rush teams. We pass a lot[for a reason]) absolutely deflects from the 'problem' of the lack of a running game.

    That is the point of the thread. How is it a problem? Are we 0-4? No, we're 4-0 cuz of our pass heavy gameplans.

    When we rush a lot, and if we fail, and if we lose, THEN it is a problem.

    Really? Maybe you do. I judge it by result and gameplan.

    Results so far: 4-0
    Gameplan: Pass against bad coverages.

    I guess that's where we differ.

    You think we should run a lot every game(even if it results in bad averages, punts, and overall hurts the team). I do not.

Share This Page