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!
  2. Announcement is LIVE: Read the Forum Post

MM- I want to beat you as bad as I can

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by longtimefan, Jun 5, 2013.

  1. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    16,743
    Ratings:
    +2,983
    http://sulia.com/channel/green-bay-packers/f/03b4de14-2335-4dbb-a1a0-74beb258526b/?source=fb
     
  2. rodell330

    rodell330 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,991
    Ratings:
    +1,013
  3. ThxJackVainisi

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    4,117
    Ratings:
    +3,188
    The Packers aren't built to play "smash mouth" football. IMO the best we can hope for is a running game that will slash/gash opponents when they overplay the Packers passing attack. And one which will help them run out the clock at the end of games.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  4. El Guapo

    El Guapo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    2,614
    Ratings:
    +1,470
    LTF - the title of this thread initially led me to believe that you wanted to beat MM as bad as you can :D After reading MM's comments, it all makes sense now...
     
    • Funny Funny x 3
  5. Forderick

    Forderick Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2012
    Messages:
    144
    Ratings:
    +82
    Just with the 2nd paragraph in the quote I can see why the packers have lost the last 2 playoff games they had. ( granted they did beat Minnesota).

    Yes McCarthy that would be great to keep throwing punches but if you don't land them or at least tire the other teams defence out, you won't win. Failure to adjust has been his biggest weakness. While that style of play may work sometimes or even most of the time, it isn't going to work all the time. And at some point you might have to adjust and try something new. And heaven forbid play keep away.

    the problem has never been the running game, it has (for the most part) been effective, the problem has always been that McCarthy doesn't run the ball nearly enough. Just look at the last game against san fran, ran the ball with Harris 10 times in the first half averaging 4.something a carry, no carries in the 2nd half. Just go back and look at their super bowl run, in every playoff game(except the super bowl) Starks ran the ball 20+ times. In the super bowl stopping the run was Pittsburgh's greatest strength on D, their secondary was weak and their pash rush was neutralized all game long. So it made sense to throw more and it worked, they had a great game plan and it worked.

    McCarthy keeps talking about how important the run game is but fails to use it.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. Jordyruns

    Jordyruns Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    436
    Ratings:
    +175
    Dear MM,

    If what you say is true and you want to play to win by as much as possible; please explain the second half of the Packers Vikings game in the wild card round of the playoffs last year. The number of pathetic run plays on first and second down followed by a pathetic pass play on 3rd and long drove me crazy. It was the definition of playing not to lose.

    Love,
    Jordyruns:inlove:
     
  7. 13 Times Champs

    13 Times Champs Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2011
    Messages:
    3,924
    Ratings:
    +1,379
    I'm afraid I look at his statement like others I've heard from him. For instance, that the Packers are going to become more physical on the field. When I see it I'll believe it. :sleep:
     
  8. ThxJackVainisi

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    4,117
    Ratings:
    +3,188
    :D
    Dear Packers fans,

    Please decide if the problem has 'ever been the running game' or if our run plays are 'pathetic'. Also please decide whether or not 'I run the ball enough' or if 'I call running plays on first and second down too often' and get back to me.

    Hugs and kisses,
    Mike McCarthy

    PS: Forderick I'm not sure what you were watching last season but I thought the running game wasn't good from the time Benson went down until the emergence of DuJuan Harris later in the season, but thanks for your support!
    :D
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. realcaliforniacheese

    realcaliforniacheese A-Rods Boss

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    2,264
    Ratings:
    +966
    I like his philosophy. When you have as much talent as you do on this offense you want to play fast. We just couldn't find a running game that would make defenses respect it last year no matter how many times we ran the ball. And when your defense can't stop the run or get turnovers it minimizes your opportunities to punch.

    I think the draft showed they are committed to correcting this, as I see it, one flaw in our offense. We now have two guys on the roster that can make a defense respect the run and contribute in the pass game. If these guys are able to provide that dimension that was missing last year then we are going to punch the S*** out of teams. They will also give the defense a real run game to practice against.

    We will see if the running game comes to fruition this year or not, but either way I am excited about the prospects the next few years. Swing away Mike.
     
  10. Kitten

    Kitten Feline Cheesehead Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2010
    Messages:
    5,093
    Ratings:
    +1,427
    We go through this every year as Packers fans wanting a running game that probably isn't going to happen. We don't play a system that is conducive to the running game. I think it's reasonable that given (if) we have the talent for RB that they can run the ball more for short gains, 3rd down conversions when it's 3rd and short but don't expect us to have running depth.
     
  11. Forderick

    Forderick Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2012
    Messages:
    144
    Ratings:
    +82

    I am by no means saying the running game was great but how can it ever be considered anything if it isn't being used? It has never been the lack of talent, but the willingness to actually run the ball.

    The NFL goes in cycles, and last year the teams that were in the super bowl both had great running games, that they actually used. Corners and the defence were starting to get smaller and faster, in order to combat the passing attack a lot of teams started to develop but the smarter teams saw this and developed a powerful running attack to combat this. I just feel the packers are a step behind and sometimes too stubborn to see the cycles.

    I am excited to see Lacy carry the ball and for his and the teams sake I just hope he actually gets to run the ball.
     
  12. GeeDogWarrior

    GeeDogWarrior 0 - 0

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2011
    Messages:
    386
    Ratings:
    +139
    I just want Mike to attack an opposing team's weakness, like in the playoff games against the Eagles/Steelers/Falcons - those games felt like the offense had a clear plan on what they were going to do...

    Shred a crappy secondary or pound the ball on a soft front seven, now it's like - let's just do whatever and hope we score a lot.
     
  13. El Guapo

    El Guapo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    2,614
    Ratings:
    +1,470
    Loss of Joe Philbin plays into that lack of strategy. He was a big part in prepping the offense for games.

    This is an important point, because I feel that a lot of fans think there is a philosophical change or decision made to move away from being prepared or "attacking" the other teams' weaknesses. That always remains to be the goal. However, teams are constantly adding and losing players, coaches, and front office personnel. Organizations change over time and often you just can't do it the way that you used to because you don't have the same skillsets anymore.
     
  14. ThxJackVainisi

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    4,117
    Ratings:
    +3,188
    I disagree: IMO there are three reasons for the Packers running game not being better. Last year was a good example of the first reason when Benson went down and no one filled the void until Harris emerged: IMO that was evidence of lack of sufficient talent at RB. And the Packers’ OL has been inconsistent run blocking at best. Newhouse wasn’t just bad pass blocking and Saturday was another hole in the OL. Beyond that the Packers offense has emphasized the pass since McCarthy arrived and talent acquisition at OL – and even at RB - has reflected that. The second reason is scheme. I don’t think the Packers OL ever bought into the ZBS completely (I don’t blame them) and after the first year, they didn’t have a single coach experienced in it. So early in his tenure as GM Thompson was acquiring OL emphasizing pass blocking and to fit the ZBS. The result was the Packers had the worst of both worlds – “finesse” OL who didn’t excel in a finesse run scheme. They have gone away from it to some extent and acquiring players like Sitton is a step in the right direction. The third reason is what you’ve posted: Even when it’s working, McCarthy has struggled being disciplined in continuing to run the ball.


    I hope the addition of Lacy and Franklin and the reshuffle on the OL improves the running game enough to give McCarthy the confidence to stick with it. But any Packers fan looking for a dominant running game is going to be disappointed. And they don't need one - it just needs to be good enough for Ds to have to bring up a safety to defend against it.

    As to the loss of Philbin, I don’t know how much that has hurt preparation and/or the production of the offense. I think it’s very difficult to assess the coordinator on the same side of the ball as the HC’s expertise. I remember last year on his show with Wilde Rodgers said he’d address the loss of Philbin after the season and I still haven’t heard him address it - and I’d like to.
     
  15. adambr2

    adambr2 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,898
    Ratings:
    +1,433

    It's like this every year. We have one crowd that thinks the Packers aren't committed to running the ball. And yet another that hates the predictable run calls followed by incomplete passes. So either way, somebody is upset.

    They've tried to address the run game. Going into 2011 they thought they had the answer with Starks, and who could've blamed them after the playoffs in 2010? They still took Alex Green in the 3rd.

    In 2012 they had Green back from injury and they went out and got Benson to try to get the pounder they had been lacking. Now they spent two picks in the 2nd and 4th to land Lacy and Franklin.

    They've done what they can with the personnel they have. You don't try to overdo and force the run game when you don't have the personnel to do it, particularly when you have the best QB in football.

    Yes, it is still in their best interest to supplement that pass game with another dimension of offense that they hope Lacy and Franklin can provide. They will try.

    They were 16th in the NFL, top half in fact, in rushing attempts. It's not like they don't try. It's not in their best interests to be any higher than that. You don't take the ball out of Aaron Rodgers' hands 35 times a game.
     
    • Like Like x 1

Share This Page