Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="easyk83" data-source="post: 632278" data-attributes="member: 8895">My point is that while the Packer passing attack is effective against good zone cover teams that it struggles against good bump n run teams. More on this later. My point is valid and Rodgers is partly to blame for that. But "Green Bay runs a flawed scheme," is different from Rodgers "***** the bed," isn't it?And that Steelers Super Bowl defense wasn't loaded with talent? They were very talented, it's just that they played a scheme that the Packer offense matched up against. We were able to spread out their zone D and take away most of their strengths. They weren't able to bunch up their D and fire blitzes up and down our Offensive front. More on this in bit.New Orleans never allowed Harris or Woodson to play bum n run. They ran bunch sets crossing routes and rubs all game long and forced our guys to play off and away from their strengths. In contrast the Packer spread ISO attack allows good cover corners to play up on our guys and basically mug them. Against less talented man cover units it still works great, but against the best cover units our guys get shut down. My whole point is that scheme is a big factor in our big game struggles and that the Packer offense needs to commit itself more to scheming guys open rather than letting them get crushed on the field.</blockquote>

No members online now.

Total: 100 (members: 1, guests: 99)