can the pack continue

Status
Not open for further replies.

bozz_2006

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 25, 2006
Messages
4,576
Reaction score
283
Location
Grand Forks, ND
Greg C. said:
dhpackr said:
MM has said he has no confidence in his running attack

Did McCarthy actually say this, or are you just making stuff up again? I would like to see the actual quote and the source, please.

MM said
You have to have a comfort when you call particular plays in certain situations, and there have been some growing pains there.
http://www.packers.com/news/releases/2007/09/24/2/

in other words, we ran passing plays on 4th and goal 'cause i have no confidence in our running game!

Oh I remember when he said that he had no confidence in his running game! that was about the same time that he mentioned that he has no confidence in Brett Favre, because he threw to the wrong guy on the 4th and 1. That's really too bad that our head coach has no confidence in our QB. It's so sad that Favre doesn't know that it's time for him to retire.
 
OP
OP
D

dhpackr

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 14, 2005
Messages
1,635
Reaction score
0
Location
SE Wisconsin
Greg C. said:
Greg C. said:
dhpackr said:
MM has said he has no confidence in his running attack

Did McCarthy actually say this, or are you just making stuff up again? I would like to see the actual quote and the source, please.

MM said
You have to have a comfort when you call particular plays in certain situations, and there have been some growing pains there.
http://www.packers.com/news/releases/2007/09/24/2/

in other words, we ran passing plays on 4th and goal 'cause i have no confidence in our running game!

This is not the same thing as saying he has no confidence in the running game. He was talking about a particular situation, not making a statement about the running game in general.

So this thread is based on a lie and I am through with it.

And by the way: Cheer up. The Packers are 3-0.

WTF what lie!!?? the coach said he was not comfortable calling a running play on 4th and inches, it is documented through a transcipt, and you call it a lie!!!

and what does that show? confidence? calling a passing play on 4th and inches?? WAKE UP MAN!!
and the thread is about the pack passing the ball 45 times a game, and can the Packers continue to do that all season, i don't see what the problem is there either.???
 

bozz_2006

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 25, 2006
Messages
4,576
Reaction score
283
Location
Grand Forks, ND
the problem is that you basically quoted mccarthy as saying he had no confidence in the running game. if you would've stated that it was your opinion, and that it was your way of interpreting what mccarthy said, there would be no problem. just be careful with what you say.
 

tromadz

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 16, 2005
Messages
999
Reaction score
3
Location
Chicago
He doesn't understand the difference between:


McCarthy doesn't have faith in the run game.

AND

I don't think McCarthy has faith in the run game.
 

GakkofNorway

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 31, 2005
Messages
2,249
Reaction score
0
Location
the Northpole
Q. Can the Packers continue to pass 40 times a game?

A. Yes, because the Packers use slants instead of running plays, which is fairly typical in the West Coast Offense, the Packers will not become one dimensional even if all you see on the stats sheet is passing. In fact 40% of those passes will be slants and should be regarded as subsitutes for running plays.
 

porky88

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
3,991
Reaction score
0
Location
Title Town
porky88 said:
The West Coast offense is actually like this to an extent. The short passing game and screens is basically the running game. The reason why you haven't seen this much is because everyone has their version of the west coast offense and a true west coast offense doesn't really exist. Seattle is close wiht Mike Holmgrem but he has Shaun Alexander too.

The last one to look like this was probably Bill Walsh's whom was the inventor of the west coast offense. So as bad as the running game is, keep in mind that the short passes and screens are really our running game. If you can find tape on the old 49ers it's a good comparison. I'm not saying we're in that class but I think that's what we're going to have to do to win games.

Now another thing to factor in is eventually teams are going to have to play the pass against the Packers. That'll open up passing lanes. Green Bay will just pass the ball until teams can stop it and when they do the running lanes should open up.

It's going to be interesting to watch.

I remember the 49ers under Walsh one year won the Superbowl with a bunch of young noname guys...

The basic idea of the West coast offense popularized by Bill Walsh is to use short slants and short horizontal routes to stretch the defense and open up passing- and running routes, in fact forcing the defense to play honest by playing unpredictable, that is why you need good routerunners (and that is why we picked Jennings and Jones instead of other receivers the fans yelled for).

However in the true West Coast offense, the passing game is 65 - 80% of your offense.

The philosophy McCarthy is developing in Green Bay looks more like Bill Walsh's old West Coast offense than any other variant of it I've seen.

Remember a lot of HC's in the NFL actually derive from Walsh in one way or another.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

Nice chart right there.

I think McCarthy's is looking like the closes thing to it as well. I remember Holmgrem's used to be but when you have Shaun Alexander, you might as well call it more of a 50-50 style. Right now the Packers are probably calling pass plays on 75% of the time which is around what you said it needs to be. If Favre can continue to play like he has then the Packers can win a Super Bowl with this offense. It's certainly possible. My main concern is the 49ers played in the sunny California weather and the Packers don't. In December and November it's going to get cold and windy and that could be what slows the Packers passing game down.
 

Zombieslayer

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 13, 2006
Messages
4,338
Reaction score
0
Location
CA
DH - I can understand your frustration. however, look at it this way.

Our running game failed in week 1. It was horrible. I won't deny that. We won because our Special Teams came through and our D held the mighty Eagles' O to only 13 points.

Week 2 - The Giants had serious DB problems. So we gameplanned to play to their weakness. It worked. We blew them away 35-13.

Week 3 - The Chargers' front 7 is awesome. Very few teams can run against them. So knowing that, MM decided that we'll have to abandon the run UNTIL we have a lead that we can sit on. Unfortunately, we never really established a comfortable lead, so we had to keep the ball in the air.

Week 4 - Make fun of the Vikings all you want. They're solid against the run. SOLID. They held Warrick Dunn to 55 yards on 22 carries. That's fantastic run D. Then, they held LJ to only 42 yards on 24 carries. That's incredible run D. You think we should run at them? I don't. I say forget the run until we're leading by at least 2 TDs. I don't care if we don't run one time until we build that lead. After we build a comfortable lead, then we can run.

As for Favre throwing 40-45 times a game, I have no problem with that when we're facing teams with run Ds like Chargers and Vikings. Don't worry, my friend. When we start playing teams with bad run Ds, we'll run 30+ times. I'm not MM, but I'm guessing he plays to their weaknesses, which is a good strategy.
 

longtimefan

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
25,356
Reaction score
4,086
Location
Milwaukee
DH - I can understand your frustration. however, look at it this way.

Our running game failed in week 1. It was horrible. I won't deny that. We won because our Special Teams came through and our D held the mighty Eagles' O to only 13 points.

Week 2 - The Giants had serious DB problems. So we gameplanned to play to their weakness. It worked. We blew them away 35-13.

Week 3 - The Chargers' front 7 is awesome. Very few teams can run against them. So knowing that, MM decided that we'll have to abandon the run UNTIL we have a lead that we can sit on. Unfortunately, we never really established a comfortable lead, so we had to keep the ball in the air.

Week 4 - Make fun of the Vikings all you want. They're solid against the run. SOLID. They held Warrick Dunn to 55 yards on 22 carries. That's fantastic run D. Then, they held LJ to only 42 yards on 24 carries. That's incredible run D. You think we should run at them? I don't. I say forget the run until we're leading by at least 2 TDs. I don't care if we don't run one time until we build that lead. After we build a comfortable lead, then we can run.

As for Favre throwing 40-45 times a game, I have no problem with that when we're facing teams with run Ds like Chargers and Vikings. Don't worry, my friend. When we start playing teams with bad run Ds, we'll run 30+ times. I'm not MM, but I'm guessing he plays to their weaknesses, which is a good strategy.

Very well put Zombie
 

vike4life

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 28, 2007
Messages
600
Reaction score
0
If MM says "We game planed to throw, because their DB's are suspect"

Someone will say "SEE!?!? He said he has no confidence in our running game!"
Some just TRY to stir up crap for their own entertainment.

Our DB's are not suspect. They are horrible. It took Herm Edwards 3 quarters to figure that out. I don't think it will take the Packers that long.
The Chiefs game was comical. They kept handing off to Larry Johnson and we were all over him. Then Herm (who may be the worst coach in the NFL) finally decided to do what all teams do against us with success. Throw the damn ball!
 

Packnic

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 29, 2006
Messages
2,454
Reaction score
6
Location
Salisbury, NC
first of all herm IS the worst coach in football... that HBO documentary was a terrible idea on his part... hes crazy.


second of all. Dh for someone who worships the ground Brett walks on... you sure do wanna take the ball out of his hands.

so basically when we were 0-0 you were complaining that Brett wasnt in the Green Bay Packer plans.

now we are 3-0 and your complaining that Brett is too much in the Green Bay Packer plans.

sounds to me like your just complaining for complaining sake. but it wouldnt be so bad if you brought half *** arguments... but instead you make up things and twist them to fit your complaint of the week.
 

warhawk

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 8, 2005
Messages
1,922
Reaction score
17
Location
Gulf Shores, Al
bozz_2006 said:
the problem is that you basically quoted mccarthy as saying he had no confidence in the running game. if you would've stated that it was your opinion, and that it was your way of interpreting what mccarthy said, there would be no problem. just be careful with what you say.

I agree. I picked up on that statement and went EVERYWHERE looking where he said this and found nothing of the sort. It's pretty sad when you put words in peoples mouth because the only negative crap you can find anywhere you have to make up.

It's so good right now some people around here who have been on the TT and MM SUCKS bandwagon can't stand it.

Pretty sad actually.
 

Obi1

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 5, 2005
Messages
1,110
Reaction score
0
In watching the Packers play this season, it reminded me of the days of Sterling Sharpe when Packers had a mediocre running game and Sharpe was used like a RB substitute.

Remember the 4 yard slants which he would catch about 6 to 7 times a game and he'd turn half of them into big gains or a TD?

Until all the ducks are in a row in the RB position, I have a feeling that driver/Jennings/Jones combo will be used in similar ways.

Personally, I like the pass first approach. It worked for Holmgren in the 90s and it is working now.

When they ran on first down vs. the Giants, they got nowhere. When they opened it up by passing on first down, they were able to score almost at will.

Having a ground attack helps but Packers right now need to set it up with the passing game.
 

digsthepack

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
2,486
Reaction score
0
Obviously, we want to establish the running game more. But, as someone mentioned earlier, 3 - 5 yards on 1st downs via the pass is just as good as running the ball. Hell, it is how, to a great extent, we got to the SBs in the 1990s.

Personally, I like the fact that MM is not so rigid in mindset (MS...ahem) that he plays to his players' strengths, instead of force feeding his "system" down their throats....something Mike "square pegs/round holes" Sherman did with regularity.

As for the resident clairvoyant...you may wish to present what the coaches/players actually say, than what you infer from their comments.
 

MassPackersFan

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
831
Reaction score
2
As for the resident clairvoyant...you may wish to present what the coaches/players actually say, than what you infer from their comments.

Please God yes. Otherwise you're going to confuse people, **** people off, start false rumors, and pretty much just be a nuisance on the message board.
 

Obi1

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 5, 2005
Messages
1,110
Reaction score
0
digsthepack said:
As for the resident clairvoyant...you may wish to present what the coaches/players actually say, than what you infer from their comments.

Please God yes. Otherwise you're going to confuse people, **** people off, start false rumors, and pretty much just be a nuisance on the message board.

Kind of like our government, the leading economists and the religious zealots
 
OP
OP
D

dhpackr

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 14, 2005
Messages
1,635
Reaction score
0
Location
SE Wisconsin
You have to have a comfort when you call particular plays in certain situations, and there have been some growing pains there.


WTF does this mean? it is MM exact words.
 
OP
OP
D

dhpackr

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 14, 2005
Messages
1,635
Reaction score
0
Location
SE Wisconsin
bozz_2006 said:
the problem is that you basically quoted mccarthy as saying he had no confidence in the running game. if you would've stated that it was your opinion, and that it was your way of interpreting what mccarthy said, there would be no problem. just be careful with what you say.

I agree. I picked up on that statement and went EVERYWHERE looking where he said this and found nothing of the sort. It's pretty sad when you put words in peoples mouth because the only negative crap you can find anywhere you have to make up.

It's so good right now some people around here who have been on the TT and MM SUCKS bandwagon can't stand it.

Pretty sad actually.
you make me laugh. did you find this statement?

You have to have a comfort when you call particular plays in certain situations, and there have been some growing pains there.
explain it!
 

Aytumious

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 16, 2006
Messages
182
Reaction score
0
You have to have a comfort when you call particular plays in certain situations, and there have been some growing pains there.


WTF does this mean? it is MM exact words.

It doesn't mean, "he has no confidence in his running attack."
 

warhawk

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 8, 2005
Messages
1,922
Reaction score
17
Location
Gulf Shores, Al
Actually, you make me laugh.

You blantantly and obviously gave YOUR interpretation of what YOU THINK his words MEANT which had nothing to do with the words that came out of his mouth.

That's a far cry from what you reported here when you said you HEARD HIM SAY he had NO CONFIDENCE in the running game.

Did they not run one in from down close in there earlier in the game? What was that? Oh, I get it. A wasted down that just happened to work out.

They were just wasting one running it up in there so they could pass on the next play and damn if he didn't score. I'm quite certain MM vowed to never try it again.

Being HE SAID he had no confidence in that part of the game and all.
 
OP
OP
D

dhpackr

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 14, 2005
Messages
1,635
Reaction score
0
Location
SE Wisconsin
dhpackr said:
You have to have a comfort when you call particular plays in certain situations, and there have been some growing pains there.


WTF does this mean? it is MM exact words.

It doesn't mean, "he has no confidence in his running attack."

so....you feel MM has confidence in his running game....right.

the packers won the game on a rushing play, but 45 passes and 15 running plays, sooner or later this game plan will be defended.

I'm not knocking a 3-0 start, i just am looking for a more balanced attack is all.
 
OP
OP
D

dhpackr

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 14, 2005
Messages
1,635
Reaction score
0
Location
SE Wisconsin
Actually, you make me laugh.

You blantantly and obviously gave YOUR interpretation of what YOU THINK his words MEANT which had nothing to do with the words that came out of his mouth.

That's a far cry from what you reported here when you said you HEARD HIM SAY he had NO CONFIDENCE in the running game.

Did they not run one in from down close in there earlier in the game? What was that? Oh, I get it. A wasted down that just happened to work out.

They were just wasting one running it up in there so they could pass on the next play and damn if he didn't score. I'm quite certain MM vowed to never try it again.

Being HE SAID he had no confidence in that part of the game and all.

are you a politician?
quit dodging the question!
What did MM mean when he said
You have to have a comfort when you call particular plays in certain situations, and there have been some growing pains there.
 

Aytumious

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 16, 2006
Messages
182
Reaction score
0
Aytumious said:
dhpackr said:
You have to have a comfort when you call particular plays in certain situations, and there have been some growing pains there.


WTF does this mean? it is MM exact words.

It doesn't mean, "he has no confidence in his running attack."

so....you feel MM has confidence in his running game....right.

the packers won the game on a rushing play, but 45 passes and 15 running plays, sooner or later this game plan will be defended.

I'm not knocking a 3-0 start, i just am looking for a more balanced attack is all.

You certainly won't see the Packers try to run the ball all that much this coming week and for good reason.

Here is the full quote, BTW.

"It's not that I don't believe in our players," he said. "I am getting more comfortable with our runners, as far as the different things we're asking them to do. You have to have a comfort when you call particular plays in certain situations, and there have been some growing pains there."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

No members online now.

Latest posts

Top