D
I think that the other team should dictate the pace at which we plan our play. On teams like SEA or the Pats, we do need to bump up the pace to get some points om the board and make them play catch up....... but with Lacy/starks combo, I sure do like the break the other guys will to play and pound the rock to wear them down to nothing appraoch. It may not be as exiting to watch, but if it puts a "W" up for us, then I don't care how we win.
I said the pace. Please dont read to far into thing. That seems to be a lot of what gets disputes going. Playing "fast" against an ultra fast defense like SEA who is known to be very physical and also known to get away with mugging WR's and delivering cheap shots and late hits..... no thanks. I would want to try to grind out their D line and LB's, force them to play closer and wear them out. That will open up a mid range pass game that would be harder for them to defend. I don't know how well the long shot will work with their DB's. They have the best secondary.
I have just never been a fan of trying to play into another teams strong points. No matter how much I can't stand the SeaCawks, their secondary is unreal. Just sherman and cam chancellor (sp?) alone are two bad ****'s.
I expect to see a lot of shotgun vs the Seachickens. The Packers can run and pass out of that formation with extra time to avoid the rush. If it's going to be fast paced expect to see that formation about 60% of the game.
Rodgers has more time to throw the ball when operating under center.
That sounds suspect to me. Source?
Even if true, I'd expect the shotgun to provide a higher quality of time in the pocket. With no drop to make, a quarterback in the shotgun is already in position to throw.
When taking a snap from center, the QB can continue to survey the defense throughout his drop. In the shotgun he has to look for the ball and then check the defense. The difference is only fractions of a second but that's the difference IMO. I know Rodgers likes the shotgun but a new factor this year will be the quality and consistency of the snaps in the shotgun.
That sounds suspect to me. Source?
Even if true, I'd expect the shotgun to provide a higher quality of time in the pocket. With no drop to make, a quarterback in the shotgun is already in position to throw.
Thank you. Took the words right out of my mouth.
You posted the advantage of the shotgun (QB already back in the pocket), I wasn’t refuting that, just stating the advantage of the QB being under center. What I wrote is indisputably true: From under center, the QB never has to interrupt his view of the defense from presnap and in the shotgun he does in order to locate the ball.The problem with that statement is it goes against the very idea of the shotgun. With no drop to make, the quarterback is (in theory) able to make a quicker throw.
What I wrote is indisputably true: From under center, the QB never has to interrupt his view of the defense from presnap and in the shotgun he does in order to locate the ball.
Rodgers had 2.84 seconds to throw when operating under center compared to 2.62 when being in the shotgun. In addition most of his stats (QB rating, yards per attempt, accuracy, TD%, INT%, sack percentage) were better when playing under center with completion percentage being the only exception.
However, the 79/21 could mean that his success under center could be a statistical oddity.
I'd also like to know exactly what they mean by Time To Throw. If Rodgers is pressured out the shotgun, but is able to step up into a nice pocket, theoretically made better because of his initial starting position, when is the stopwatch stopped?
PFF defines Time To Throw as the average time until a QB attempts a pass, gets sacked or scrambles past the line of scrimmage.