Guion Slapped With 3 Games

[TJV]

I think we need to add QB to the list. How about OL? Barclay is coming off an ACL, he's the only backup who's taken more than a smattering of snaps, and the others have not looked very good in limited play. FB is the frequently forgotten position. Pre-bye, Kuhn played 58 offensive snaps with Lacy putting up the following stat line: 105/428/4.1. Post-bye, with Kuhn getting 191 offensive snaps, Lacy went into 141/711/5.0.

While I like Ripkowski's potential, it could take some time for him to be productive in this blocking scheme with this RB. We've seen inexperienced H-backs in the past accomplish little except muck up the works (Quarless, R. Taylor). All it took was Quarless' gun idiocy to expose the TE position which was hardly a position of strength to start with.

We disagree about Tolzien. I’m comfortable with him as the backup and more important they were comfortable enough to let Flynn go. He's got the physical ability and I'm confident his work ethic has improved the mental side of his game. Barclay did take part in some of the OTA activities in May. Neither are sure things but I think it’s reasonable to expect Barclay to be fully recovered to start TC and I consider him an adequate backup. We also disagree about Tretter. He doesn’t have experience but they had enough confidence in him to start him at OC last year and he looked OK in preseason IMO. He should be able to expand his role as backup to more than just OC.

I think Kuhn’s increased snaps had a lot to do with the lack of effective blocking from the TE position (of course I agree with the lack of depth at TE), but Kuhn did OK as lead blocker. But the more that is his role and less it is to “protect and check down in third-and-long situations” (from McGinn’s season ending review) and STs, the more I’d like to see Ripkowski take over at FB. But my job doesn’t depend upon him being nearly error free when the season starts.

As for the reasons for the lack of depth, I agree about 2012-2012 “hole”. I’d note that 2011 4th rounder House turned out to be a good pick but that doesn’t do the Packers any good now (except re: comp picks). Thompson missed completely on Sherrod in the first round (due at least in part to injury) in 2011 and IMO his obvious need-picking six straight defenders in 2012 came back to bite him and the Packers.

 

[HardRightEdge]

We disagree about Tolzien.

I'm sure we both hope to never find out who's right.

 

[HardRightEdge]

There are "possibilities" at a couple of positions on D and backups on both sides of the ball which translate into uncertainty. And listing players who we hope step up is fine but doesn’t lessen that uncertainty.

It's fair to assume some young player or players will show sufficient ability as at least serviceable backups. The question is whether they're the guys you need at the spots where you need them when you need them.

Even so, I prefer this situation to the "certainty" last season of having Hawk and Brad Jones at ILB. And we should all be encouraged by the improvement the D showed after the bye last season.

There's no question that ILB was improved with Matthews at ILB. But there is a stealing from Peter to pay Paul in that move, taking Matthews off the edge. Further, Matthews, by his own admission, was playing on instinct, as one would expect getting tossed into the spot in a bye week. There is an element of the "triumph of the uncluttered mind" in the effectiveness of that move, and an unpredictability to it. Now, teams have tape to study and can work out some adjustments. Further, there's a risk that Capers will box him into "assignments" given the time to do it. Like Woodson, he might have to fight that to maintain a free-lancing edge to his game. Anybody who questions this proposition should note the affect Capers' prohibition of edge rushing to the back of the pocket, to which Packer players, including Matthews, strictly adhere.

As to who starts at 3 technique, although not ideal I like Neal taking snaps there – as HRE mentioned - ahead of Peppers who is more valuable at OLB.

You'll note I mentioned Neal at 3-tech in "long yardage". The Packers run a lot of nickel in tweener run-pass downs, e.g., 2nd. and 5, 3rd. and 3. I'd be concerned opponents would exploit the size mismatch by running at him in those situations.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I think we need to add QB to the list.

How about OL? Barclay is coming off an ACL, he's the only backup who's taken more than a smattering of snaps, and the others have not looked very good in limited play.

FB is the frequently forgotten position. Pre-bye, Kuhn played 58 offensive snaps with Lacy putting up the following stat line: 105/428/4.1. Post-bye, with Kuhn getting 191 offensive snaps, Lacy went into 141/711/5.0.

http://www.foxsports.com/wisconsin/story/green-bay-packers-annual-checkup-john-kuhn-031215

While I like Ripkowski's potential, it could take some time for him to be productive in this blocking scheme with this RB. We've seen inexperienced H-backs in the past accomplish little except muck up the works (Quarless, R. Taylor).

All it took was Quarless' gun idiocy to expose the TE position which was hardly a position of strength to start with.

We've already explored the issues with the D-Line by just subtracting Guion from the equation.

The only position groups with experienced depth are S, OLB and RB.

How did this come to be?

1) Last season was so injury free in the starting ranks that the only young players who got any meaningful playing time were the guys who are now starters: Dix, Linsley, Barrington.

2) Perhaps overlooked is the 2 year draft/UDFA hole from 2011 and 2012. There are only 7 players left on the roster from those draft classes. Daniels, Hayward and Cobb are starters. Perry might or might not be, but that is one of the 3 acknowledged positions of experienced depth. The other 3 are Barclay (again, coming off an ACL and the only qualified OL backup), Tolzien (can he or can't he in a short-term pinch?) and Richardson (who's primarily an ST player and occasional dime safety at one of the 3 positions of depth).

To further illustrate the hole, there are as many players on the roster from the 2008-2009 draft classes as in those 2 draft classes, despite the fact that the 2012 drafted players would still be on cheap rookie contracts and immune to free agency to this point.

3) The 2013 draft class is interesting as well.

While there are 10 players from that draft class on the roster, a particularly high yield, 6 of them starters or D-Line rotational players. And despite the 2 D-Line rotational players form that class (Boyd, Jones), we've already discussed how the subtraction of one player (Guion) leaves the position group exposed regardless. The other 4 "depth players" are Lane Taylor (who's perennially on the bubble with limited unimpressive experience), Tretter (meh, limited as a center backup, few snaps to date), Mulumba (again, in the experienced OLB group but primarily an ST player) and Palmer (another bubble player who hasn't played at his new ILB assignment.)

We've discussed about Tolzien as the backup QB before and in comparison to you I'm convinced the Packers could go .500 with him if Rodgers misses some games.

Barclay is capable of playing four positions on the line and Tretter was pencilled in as the starter at center before getting injured, so I'm fine with the depth on the OL. BTW I expect Matt Rotheram to make the team and turn into a decent guard.

Even after the bye Kuhn played only 27% of the snaps. IMO there's no need to worry about the backup at a position hardly used in the first place.

Tight end should be added to the list if Quarless gets suspended.

There are enough experienced defensive linemen on the roster, having two guys suspended for the opener isn't a good start to the season though.

I agree with your take on the drafts but might add that Adams and Rodgers got significant playing time last season as well.

 

[HardRightEdge]

We've discussed about Tolzien as the backup QB before and in comparison to you I'm convinced the Packers could go .500 with him if Rodgers misses some games.

Perhaps. But there is no basis to think so. Positive comments by McCarthy are no guarantee. We've hear them before with Harrell and Coleman. Nor is preseason performance. I prefer to go by what I've seen in money games.[/QUOTE]

Barclay is capable of playing four positions on the line and Tretter was pencilled in as the starter at center before getting injured, so I'm fine with the depth on the OL. BTW I expect Matt Rotheram to make the team and turn into a decent guard.

Perhaps. It's easier to remember the guys who bounce back from an ACL after one year. It's harder to remember the guys who take longer or wash out. A guy can get away with range of motion limitations at G or C playing in close quarters. OT is a different matter. Barclay is more of a scrapper than an athletic guy; any diminishment of his athleticism would prove problematic. He was not a full participant in OTAs. Tretter has limited experience, which is the issue at hand, and has not looked good in his few snaps. Saturday was penned in at C at some cost; that did not work out so well.[/QUOTE]

Even after the bye Kuhn played only 27% of the snaps. IMO there's no need to worry about the backup at a position hardly used in the first place.

First of all, 27% of the snaps is not an afterthought. If that were the case, we wouldn't care much about who plays on the base D-line since that's about the number snaps at those positions in a typical game. Regardless of what one might think about the importance of the position...it is still a position to be played and there is no experienced depth. So, add FB to the list.

Now, as to the position's importance. Many, if not most, of those 191 Kuhn snaps post-bye were in run blocking. Lacy and Starks combined for 182 carries post-bye. Kuhn himself ran the ball only 14 times and caught 2 passes post-bye.

A fullback blocking in zone scheme has to find the right guy and at the right angle so as not to plug up a potential running hole, and he has to make a pre-snap read just as O-Linemen must do and then get at right quick. Kuhn will never be confused with a road grader, but he makes smart decisions, gets in sync with the O-Line, and gets a body on a guy that matters. McCarthy has tried Ryan Taylor, Quarless and Rodgers at H-back in recent years without much success to date; it's as simple as they didn't/don't effectively read and react in a scheme where there's no predefined man to hit except perhaps in short yardage blocking.

While FB/H-back is nearly universally discounted as an afterthought, he's on the field for a reason. Having a guy on the field who doesn't know what he's doing, which has been the case with those aforementioned H-backs, is tantamount to playing 10 on 11 for those 27% of the snaps. Kuhn being named first team All Pro among the dozen or so "first team" FBs left in the league was not entirely arbitrary nor merely a career award.

I like Ripkowski. The fact Stoops runs a zone scheme at OU works in his favor and may go some ways in accounting for why he was drafted. But there is still a learning curve. There is not bench experience. We have to see him play. Again, the position belongs on the list.

Tight end should be added to the list if Quarless gets suspended.

Oh, he'll be suspended alright. The only question is when and for how long. Even if the NFL's investigation is not complete by opening day, they may suspend him with pay anyway. With the league's new-found sensitivity to violence against women (discharging a gun would certainly qualify as sufficiently threatening), figure on 3-4 games. "Conduct detrimental" does not even require a criminal charge or plea. The only thing working for him is he's such a low profile player his stupidity is barely a blip on the NFL's PR radar.

Quarless is in his contract year. He's a merely serviceable player in need of an upgrade. Any viable alternative at all would result in him not being offered a contract after this season. Rodgers could not bump him out of the starter's spot. Then the team brought Gresham in for a visit. I'd consider him squarely on the bubble pending a replacement. Since the replacement is not on the roster currently, consider it a depth issue.

There are enough experienced defensive linemen on the roster, having two guys suspended for the opener isn't a good start to the season though.

Well, we've already discussed the issues associated with merely having Guion absent. Even in a 3-4, there are essentially 4 starters to handle both 5- and 3-tech D-Line is fairly unique in that a 3 down player is typically limited to 75% or less of the snaps so there's still some gas in the tank come the 4th. quarter. Consequently a 5th. is needed to round out the rotation unless you've got three Mike Daniels on the roster, which the Packers clearly do not.

With Guion suspended, there are 5 guys with NFL experience, mostly undistinguished, including Pennel with 171 snaps last season. I find this last number interesting. Before I looked it up, I would have guessed about 100, which I take to be testament to his general invisibility. If Guion were not suspended, he'd not be on this team. He'd be the #3 NT with no ability to play any of the other D-Line positions.

Even without the suspensions, I judge this to be the Packers weakest starting/rotational position group. If there were experienced depth on the roster, that would not be the case to start with.

I agree with your take on the drafts but might add that Adams and Rodgers got significant playing time last season as well.

We're talking about depth, right? 3-wide is the "starting" alignment, just as nickel is the "starting" defensive alignment. Adams is a starter. Rodgers too in Quarless' absence, which may become permanent sooner rather than later.

 

[Raptorman]

I wonder how Guion's appeal goes? Think he'll get a game or two knocked off?

I don't think they will knock any of the games off. I would be surprised if they do.

 

[TJV]

(Regarding Tolzien) Perhaps. But there is no basis to think so. Positive comments by McCarthy are no guarantee. We've hear them before with Harrell and Coleman. Nor is preseason performance. I prefer to go by what I've seen in money games.

But there's a huge caveat regarding what you've seen in money games. Tolzien was promoted from the PS and spent 6 days on the active roster preparing as Wallace’s backup before entering his first game as a Packer against the Eagles. He then prepared for 6 days as the starter for the Giants game. He had nearly zero practice with the first team until after the Eagles' game. Why wouldn't you take that into consideration? Do you really believe the 2014 off season, TC, and preseason and this year's off season, TC, and preseason make no difference? And you dismiss his upcoming performance in preseason (perhaps because he performed better than Flynn in the 2014 preseason?) which will likely, hopefully be his only opportunity to show progress.

I pretty much agree with the rest of your post except I thought Tretter did OK as the starting OC in preseason until he got injured.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Perhaps. But there is no basis to think so. Positive comments by McCarthy are no guarantee. We've hear them before with Harrell and Coleman. Nor is preseason performance. I prefer to go by what I've seen in money games.

Tolzien was signed two months before he had to play in his first game with the Packers. He showed some promise during those appearances although he most likely didn't get any snaps with the #1 offense before he was named the starter the week before the Giants game. IMO it's untealistic to expect any better results under those circumstances.

Perhaps. It's easier to remember the guys who bounce back from an ACL after one year. It's harder to remember the guys who take longer or wash out. A guy can get away with range of motion limitations at G or C playing in close quarters. OT is a different matter. Barclay is more of a scrapper than an athletic guy; any diminishment of his athleticism would prove problematic. He was not a full participant in OTAs. Tretter has limited experience, which is the issue at hand, and has not looked good in his few snaps. Saturday was penned in at C at some cost; that did not work out so well.

Barclay's health is an issue, hopefully he'll be 100% when camp opens next week.

Now, as to the position's importance. Many, if not most, of those 191 Kuhn snaps post-bye were in run blocking. Lacy and Starks combined for 182 carries post-bye. Kuhn himself ran the ball only 14 times and caught 2 passes post-bye.

Kuhn only played 134 snaps, with 85 of them coming in run blocking, during the second half of the regular season when Lacy and Starks combined to carry the ball 182 times. His playing time increased as soon as Rodgers injured his calf at Tampa.

Don't get me wrong, I understand Kuhn's value to the team but I don't think there's a need to worry about his backup.

Well, we've already discussed the issues associated with merely having Guion absent. Even in a 3-4, there are essentially 4 starters to handle both 5- and 3-tech D-Line is fairly unique in that a 3 down player is typically limited to 75% or less of the snaps so there's still some gas in the tank come the 4th. quarter. Consequently a 5th. is needed to round out the rotation unless you've got three Mike Daniels on the roster, which the Packers clearly do not.

With Guion suspended, there are 5 guys with NFL experience, mostly undistinguished, including Pennel with 171 snaps last season. I find this last number interesting. Before I looked it up, I would have guessed about 100, which I take to be testament to his general invisibility. If Guion were not suspended, he'd not be on this team. He'd be the #3 NT with no ability to play any of the other D-Line positions.

Even without the suspensions, I judge this to be the Packers weakest starting/rotational position group. If there were experienced depth on the roster, that would not be the case to start with.

Overall the defensive line has sufficient talent with Daniels, Raji, Guion, Jones and Boyd. A lot of the unit's performance is dependent on the play of Raji, which I'm nervous about but there's some hope he will at least be improved compared to 2011-13. There isn't a single 3-4 team in this league being seven deep with experienced players on the DL capable of not missing a beat ith two guys being suspended.

We're talking about depth, right? 3-wide is the "starting" alignment, just as nickel is the "starting" defensive alignment. Adams is a starter. Rodgers too in Quarless' absence, which may become permanent sooner rather than later.

While that's true I was referring to your statement not including them in your list of youngsters who got significant playing time in 2014.

 

[HardRightEdge]

But there's a huge caveat regarding what you've seen in money games. Tolzien was promoted from the PS and spent 6 days on the active roster preparing as Wallace’s backup before entering his first game as a Packer against the Eagles. He then prepared for 6 days as the starter for the Giants game. He had nearly zero practice with the first team until after the Eagles' game. Why wouldn't you take that into consideration? Do you really believe the 2014 off season, TC, and preseason and this year's off season, TC, and preseason make no difference? And you dismiss his upcoming performance in preseason (perhaps because he performed better than Flynn in the 2014 preseason?) which will likely, hopefully be his only opportunity to show progress.

I pretty much agree with the rest of your post except I thought Tretter did OK as the starting OC in preseason until he got injured.

I'll go by my own reading, thank you. There's a thing called field presence and pocket presence that cannot be measured. He looks mechanical.

However lazy, physically limited and unappreciative of Rodgers' sense of humor Flynn might have been, when the money games came around he took command. The guy was a gamer. The fact he didn't do much in preseason fits his MO...he's one of those guys who doesn't get the juices flowing until it matters. If Wonderlic scores mean anything, which they do, he probably had the highest native intelligence in the building, but evidently preferred to play with an uncluttered mind. That's not say he didn't have a sound grasp of the offense; he just preferred not to dwell on it.

From a coaches standpoint, a QB with a poor work ethic is a tough guy to keep around, as his short stints here and there attest, rumors of elbow issues notwithstanding. That doesn't mean he isn't the best option to win on a given Sunday.

 

[HardRightEdge]

While that's true I was referring to your statement not including them in your list of youngsters who got significant playing time in 2014.

I wasn't talking about youngsters per se...I was talking about experienced depth.

Be that as it may, I see a lot to like in Adams who could have considerable upside if the Packers can find enough ball to go around.

Rodgers? No so much. He's not fluid in his routes, and while he looks like he should be a good blocker, he isn't. With a rookie you expect mistakes. But you should see an occasional flash play. Rodgers was flashless.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Rodgers? No so much. He's not fluid in his routes, and while he looks like he should be a good blocker, he isn't. With a rookie you expect mistakes. But you should see an occasional flash play. Rodgers was flashless.

Rodgers had some flash plays last season like the go-ahead TD reception vs. the Cowboys or the 32-yard TD catch vs. the Patriots.

He won't ever turn into a top echelon tight end, but should turn into a reliable #2 TE. Unfortunately he will most likely end up on top of the depth chart for this season.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Kuhn only played 134 snaps, with 85 of them coming in run blocking, during the second half of the regular season....

Not according to the link I posted. Regardless, the point was that Kuhn was blocking on "many if not most" of the runs in the second half. According to your numbers, "nearly half" would be the right characterization. So, you've said nothing to cause me to alter my analysis.

...when Lacy and Starks combined to carry the ball 182 times.

Hmm...I think I missed Starks 1 carry for 2 yards against New England. Regardless, you're really going to correct 181 to 182? When correcting errors to discredit an argument, you should stick to the ones that matter. In those cases, I will concede the point as I have in the past. This kind of correction just looks petty.

His playing time increased as soon as Rodgers injured his calf at Tampa.

Kuhn pass blocked only 24 times all season. Rodgers injury had nothing to do with it. McCarthy judged that Lacy would run more effectively in a 2-back set. He was right. Right enough he gave Lacy the ball more often and to better affect.

Don't get me wrong, I understand Kuhn's value to the team but I don't think there's a need to worry about his backup.

"Value to the team" is an amorphous term. The issue is the FB position. It was not so long ago you were absolutely convinced the Packers would not carry 2 FBs. We debated the point. If you still believe that, while thinking there is no reason to worry about the position, then I must conclude have no FB is nothing to worry about in your mind. Correct?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Not according to the link I posted. Regardless, the point was that Kuhn was blocking on "many if not most" of the runs in the second half. According to your numbers, "nearly half" would be the right characterization. So, you've said nothing to cause me to alter my analysis.

Well, then the author of the article got it wrong. The Packers ran the ball 241 times during the second half of the regular season, so Kuhn run blocked on 35.3% of them.

Hmm...I think I missed Starks 1 carry for 2 yards against New England. Regardless, you're really going to correct 181 to 182? When correcting errors to discredit an argument, you should stick to the ones that matter. In those cases, I will concede the point as I have in the past. This kind of correction just looks petty.

I didn´t even realize I used a different number than you, I just went with the total a search on Pro Football Reference returned. RELAX!!!

Kuhn pass blocked only 24 times all season. Rodgers injury
had nothing to do with it. McCarthy judged that Lacy would run more effectively in a 2-back set. He was right. Right enough he gave Lacy the ball more often and to better affect.

While Kuhn didn´t pass block a whole lot he played 103 of his total of 249 snaps after Rodgers got injured in Tampa.

"Value to the team" is an amorphous term. The issue is the FB position. It was not so long ago you were absolutely convinced the Packers would not carry 2 FBs. We debated the point. If you still believe that, while thinking there is no reason to worry about the position, then I must conclude have no FB is nothing to worry about in your mind. Correct?

I can´t remember me saying that we shouldn´t keep both Kuhn and Ripkowski on the roster. Before the draft I highly doubted the Packers selecting a fullback but obviously I was proven wrong.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Rodgers had some flash plays last season like the go-ahead TD reception vs. the Cowboys or the 32-yard TD catch vs. the Patriots.

Those plays are in the following link:

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

He did not get separation on either of those plays. On the New England play, Rodgers put the ball right on his hands against Pat Chung, who's not on the field primarily for his coverage ability. On the Dallas play, Rodgers threaded the needle between 2 defenders right on his numbers.

While I would not diminish the importance of running where you're supposed to be and catching the ball when the QB puts it right on you, that certainly does not qualify as particularly athletic or flash-like. Or looked at another way, if he dropped either of those balls he's a goat, therefore making the catch is not something exceptional.

There are some catches in that tape that did make me sit up some but they belong to Adams.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Those plays are in the following link:

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

He did not get separation on either of those plays. On the New England play, Rodgers put the ball right on his hands against Pat Chung, who's not on the field primarily for his coverage ability. On the Dallas play, Rodgers threaded the needle between 2 defenders right on his numbers.

While I would not diminish the importance of running where you're supposed to be and catching the ball when the QB puts it right on you, that certainly does not qualify as particularly athletic or flash-like. Or looked at another way, if he dropped either of those balls he's a goat, therefore making the catch is not something exceptional.

There are some catches in that tape that did make me sit up some but they belong to Adams.

Rodgers is for sure not the most athletic gifted tight end in the league but he has sure hands. He got enough separation on all the plays in the video above and was able to hold on to the ball, not sure why there´s a need to criticize him when making plays.

 

[Carl]

Isn't it normal for the Packers to have young backups? TT always builds his team like this.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Well, then the author of the article got it wrong. The Packers ran the ball 241 times during the second half of the regular season, so Kuhn run blocked on 35.3% of them.

Let's see. You count 241 runs in the second half of the season. You count 182 by Lacy and Starks. That's a 59 difference. Non-QBs other than the lead two ran the ball 51 times over the entire season. I don't know if the 241 is correct of not, but it's certainly not relevant.

I can´t remember me saying that we shouldn't keep both Kuhn and Ripkowski on the roster. Before the draft I highly doubted the Packers selecting a fullback but obviously I was proven wrong.

I think you're right. There was a discussion where I advocated for one pre-draft, specifically Tyler Varga. You doubted the Packers needed one.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Let's see. You count 241 runs in the second half of the season. You count 182 by Lacy and Starks. That's a 59 difference. Non-QBs other than the lead two ran the ball 51 times over the entire season. I don't know if the 241 is correct of not, but it's certainly not relevant.

It is relevant as we only know that Kuhn run blocked on 85 of the 241 runs during the second half of the season but not on which of them.

 

[HardRightEdge]

It is relevant as we only know that Kuhn run blocked on 85 of the 241 runs during the second half of the season but not on which of them.

You should break down the 59 runs you came up with in the second half not accounted for by Lacy/Starks. Since non-QBs ran only 51 times all season, either the 241 count is wrong or the QBs ran quite a bit, which would be substantially pass plays.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

You should break down the 59 runs you came up with in the second half not accounted for by Lacy/Starks. Since non-QBs ran only 51 times all season, either the 241 count is wrong or the QBs ran quite a bit, which would be substantially pass plays.

Here´s the break down you´re looking for: Rodgers ran the ball 24 times during the second half of the regular season, Kuhn had 14 rushes, Harris 8, Cobb 7 and Flynn 6. This lists includes a total of 13 kneel downs though (Rodgers 7, Flynn 6).

As we´re talking about Kuhn here though it would be important to get a break down of the production during the run plays he was blocking for.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Here´s the break down you´re looking for: Rodgers ran the ball 24 times during the second half of the regular season, Kuhn had 14 rushes, Harris 8, Cobb 7 and Flynn 6. This lists includes a total of 13 kneel downs though (Rodgers 7, Flynn 6).

As we´re talking about Kuhn here though it would be important to get a break down of the production during the run plays he was blocking for.

So, 17 runs were all or nearly all broken pass plays since GB does not call QB runs, and we know Kuhn was rarely on the field for pass plays last season. You could probably count QB sneaks over the past 5 years on one hand. Maybe no hands. Conversely, if he was on the field for the kneel downs, that work against the Kuhn argument; if wasn't that would help.

Having that breakdown might be helpful. Or not. A down and distance breakdown would then be needed. If Kuhn was out there on mostly run/pass tweener downs with 6 or 7 in the box, and Lacy gained marginally above his overall second half average, the argument for his contribution would be weaker. If Kuhn was on the field disproportionately for short yardage situations, and Lacy matched his second half average on Kuhn plays, then the argument would be stronger. Then we'd be so deep in the weeds we'd have to take an unplayable lie (to use a golf reference).

For me it comes down to an eye test. In the past, it was my view that Lacy would be more affective in single-back sets, which was McCarthy's approach in the first half of 2014. In a zone scheme with a one-cut-and-go RB who's most affective between the tackles, the fullback can get in the way, either impairing vision or clogging up the hole. Watching Kuhn block for him in the second half, there were several plays which led to believe I was wrong. A less savvy FB, less experienced and less in tune with the O-Line, might be a problem.

We'll have to see how Ripkowski does...as noted previously he played in a zone scheme at Oklahoma, which should give him a leg up in the transition. However, this note from the nfl.com scouting report suggests he has some work to do for other than short yardage man blocking if he doesn't get concussed in the process:

"Old-school blocking back who will have a hit or two each game that wows the crowd and gets his teammates fired up. He often charges in head-first and with a lowered head, so his success rate can vary greatly from game to game."

 

[Deleted member 6794]

For me it comes down to an eye test. In the past, it was my view that Lacy would be more affective in single-back sets, which was McCarthy's approach in the first half of 2014. In a zone scheme with a one-cut-and-go RB who's most affective between the tackles, the fullback can get in the way, either impairing vision or clogging up the hole. Watching Kuhn block for him in the second half, there were several plays which led to believe I was wrong. A less savvy FB, less experienced and less in tune with the O-Line, might be a problem.

The Packers used a two-back set on 41.2% of the rushes in 2014, averaging 4.5 yards and finishing third in DVOA out of those formations. In comparison the team averaged 4.3 yards per carry and finished 15th in DVOA out of single-back sets. It seems like those stats pass the eye test.

 

[HardRightEdge]

The Packers used a two-back set on 41.2% of the rushes in 2014, averaging 4.5 yards and finishing third in DVOA out of those formations. In comparison the team averaged 4.3 yards per carry and finished 15th in DVOA out of single-back sets. It seems like those stats pass the eye test.

If the 2-back sets were used disproportionately in short yardage situations, the adjusted spread in yards per carry would be wider. Since FO's DVOA claims to make precisely these adjustments, you are correct...their results do square with my eye test.

Of course Kuhn's snaps would need to be ferreted out from those where an H-back was used, which would, according to my eye test, make his contribution look even better.

I conclude that having an effective FB in the absence of an effective blocking H-back is important to the Packer offense, and replacing Kuhn if he were injured this season may not be as easy as it looks. As with offensive linemen, the FB has a learning curve for his pre-snap reads, and in then taking an effective line of attack.

 

[Curly Calhoun]

As they say, next man up, which would appear to be B.J. Raji. Guion better have a good camp.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

As they say, next man up, which would appear to be B.J. Raji. Guion better have a good camp.

Raji is pencilled in as the team´s nose tackle with Guion most likely the starter at defensive end in the base defense. With Letroy being suspended the Packers lack another DE best suited to defend the run.