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!
    Dismiss Notice

My (optimistic) Conspiracy Theory

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by FrankRizzo, Dec 18, 2011.

  1. FrankRizzo

    FrankRizzo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 2, 2010
    Messages:
    5,889
    Ratings:
    +1,679
    OK, follow me on this one.
    This part is from Packers.com, Vic Ketchman's story.
    Alright, here's my theory which paints McCarthy as a GENIUS:

    -We all know our path to the Super Bowl goes thru Lambeau in January, which is going to be cold conditions not conducive to our precision passing game. Even the wind today in 50 degree weather seemed to have an effect. So in those conditions, the team with the better running game, and better time of possession, will have some advantage.

    Remember the wildcard win at Philly, outdoors? That was James Starks 120 yards leading the way. Rodgers wasn't awesome in that game. Neither was he in week 17 vs Chicago, or in the NFC Title game at Chicago. Cold weather affects everything.

    So, with this game tape on film, reading this and what Rodgers, Donald, said.... teams are going to defend us this way too.... safeties wide.... press coverage, etc. But what it does do is allows some room to run, and Grant had about 5-6 yards per carry today, in 12 carries. But being our only available halfback today, with Swaine and Starks out, I think McCarthy didn't want to risk running Ryan too much, but also wants opponents to forget about that for us......

    I think, maybe, McCarthy has some tricks up his sleeve and he wants defenses to prepare to defend that way, which will allow him to feature a little more of Starks, Grant, and Saine in January. Hit them with a surprise running game.

    If it works, it will also open up the passing game, and keep a little heat off the OL and Rodgers as now, you see every edge rusher just going wide around Newhouse and whoever the RT is. Dangit I wish we hadn't lost Alex Green.

    Maybe that's not a "conspiracy" theory.....
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. GreenBlood

    GreenBlood Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Messages:
    1,705
    Ratings:
    +652
    Not yet it doesn't. We still have to win another game or SF has to lose another one.
     
  3. Bensalama21

    Bensalama21 Ben

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Messages:
    1,575
    Ratings:
    +609
    Too be honest, the chances of the Packers not getting the first seed is as small as a grain of sand. Even if we blow the last 2 games, I think it might be even better playing in a dome against the Saints for us.
     
  4. GreenBlood

    GreenBlood Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Messages:
    1,705
    Ratings:
    +652
    Playing the Saints at their place is NOT a good scenario. We wouldn't have any more trouble playing at Lambeau (a preposterous notion anyway) than the Saints would. All things being equal, I'd much rather have our fans in the stands.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  5. realcaliforniacheese

    realcaliforniacheese A-Rods Boss

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    2,277
    Ratings:
    +966
    Why are we even talking about playing anywhere but lambeau? we had a bad day. we will never go to the Saints. we own the tie breaker.
     
  6. ExpatPacker

    ExpatPacker Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2011
    Messages:
    1,483
    Ratings:
    +630
    Well McCarthy's genius did not extend to his gameplan, which was terrible. With Rodgers getting that much pressure we should have gone for a lot more short passes, screens and quick slants, that together with runs. Instead Rodgers was dropping back and waiting for routes to develop, getting hit and viola...

    I don't understand why given the decimated OL the Packers haven't gone for a shorter passing game instead of continuing to try and force the ball down field. Rodgers is getting hammered back there.
     
  7. Lionheart

    Lionheart Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2010
    Messages:
    18
    Ratings:
    +5
    It's not that far-fetched. The Packers are working on game plans for the playoffs which they don't want to reveal in the regular season, because they don't need to. But so are other teams. That's why come January a whole new season beggins. The teams who barely make it to the playoffs will be on a roll, extremelly confident for getting past the hurdle. Like the Pack last season. So nothing can be taken for granted, even if we always play at Lambeau Field. Remember the Giants-Packers game in 2008 for the NFC Championship...

    The Chiefs were tactically smart, read the Packers game very well and adapted accordingly to prevent us from playing our best. The fact that the Pack were not in full force played a big part in it too, because you can have a great game plan but not be able to implement it if your opponent is more talented, healthy and motivated. The Packers didn't have the last two factors yesterday.

    The problem with the OL is that it comes under a lot of pressure every game because all teams go after Aaron Rogers. It's the key part of their defensive strategy and that's wearing out our OL. One more reason why the Packers need an effective running game, and why McCarthy doesn't want to risk bringing back Starks too soon.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Marem19

    Marem19 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2011
    Messages:
    72
    Ratings:
    +28
    Funny thing I might be more optimistic in us winning the super bowl cause we got the bad game out of our system. I think we are going to.have a good showing of our running game and defense cause the D shows up big at home especially against a bad team and the bears are bad right now just what we need a bad team to beat up on
     
  9. GreenBlood

    GreenBlood Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Messages:
    1,705
    Ratings:
    +652
    Good point. It was Frankie that said that. I forgot the only other place we could possibly play at this point is SF.
     
  10. GreenBlood

    GreenBlood Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Messages:
    1,705
    Ratings:
    +652
    Losing yesterday doesn't increase our chances of winning in the playoffs. I think the only one that had a bad game was Finley. The OL just had too many injuries to function. We have to get Bulaga back (and I think he might be back next week) and Clifton for the playoffs. We also need to pull out the old Rolodex and see what Mark Tauscher is up to these days. They should at least bring him in for a workout and see if there's any possibility of him being ready to go when the playoffs start in 4 weeks as a backup.
     
  11. net

    net Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2005
    Messages:
    980
    Ratings:
    +86
    There's no conspiracy or devious plan. Fact is the Chiefs had a couple good press corners who locked up Jordy Nelson, etc.
    As usual, McCarthy abandoned the run too early after it showed some promise. Someone said he was afraid to get a running back hurt, but what was the difference if he had? If the Packers had worked to control the ball more they would have controlled the clock. As it was, the Chiefs controlled the clock, thanks to some really bad play by the d-line and linebackers, coupled with the continuing lack of a pass rush. Capers barely called a blitz yesterday and let Orton pick the secondary apart.
    The Chiefs also used some really effective d-line play from 4 players, allowing 7 back in coverage.
    Romeo C. outthought Mike Mc. yesterday.
    But Mike Mc has won most of the battles over the past year.
     
  12. FrankRizzo

    FrankRizzo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 2, 2010
    Messages:
    5,889
    Ratings:
    +1,679
    Rodgers disagrees with that assessment.
    [​IMG]
    74 Marshall Newhouse had a worse game than Finley. If you don't think he had a bad game, then you have awfully-low expectations for him and the left tackle position. He mad Hali look like a hybrid combo of Reggie White/Lawrence Taylor.
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
  13. Marem19

    Marem19 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2011
    Messages:
    72
    Ratings:
    +28
    I know that I just think that the team will be even more motivated than they already were
     
  14. GreenBlood

    GreenBlood Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Messages:
    1,705
    Ratings:
    +652
    That's pretty much it. I actually don't have very high expectations for Newhouse. I simply don't think he's very good to begin with. He did about what I expected of him, after the whooping he got from Pierre-Paul and Allen earlier this year.

    Lousy tackles tend to do that.
     
  15. Poppa San

    Poppa San SB I trophy First of four Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2010
    Messages:
    5,839
    Ratings:
    +1,631
    WOW! Most of this thread pertains to almost every game after the bye week THIS season, especially the parts on how the KC defense attacked the Packers offense. Almost the SAME issues. Genius MM STILL can't recognize and adapt to an attacking pressing defense.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  16. weeds

    weeds Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    2,380
    Ratings:
    +1,231
    Did "Frank Rizzo's" owner adopt a different smurf name? Come out, come out where ever you are... what ever happened to Frank?
     
  17. JBlood

    JBlood Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2004
    Messages:
    3,158
    Ratings:
    +1,312
    Well, the offensive line issues have been the same since 2008 under Campen. The last statistically good o-line he's coached was the one he inherited from Philbin in 2007. The line has degenerated into mediocrity since, which has been camouflaged by the play of a HOF caliber QB that is amazing in scrambling. So the Packers will have their 3rd assistant o-line coach in 3 years as the answer, assuming they hire one. I don't understand it.
     

Share This Page