RUN GAME!!!!

[weeds]

The Packers pulled a guard yesterday!!!

Hey, I'm happy as a stuck pig with the newfound emphasis on actually establishing a running game. Almost 50/50 run to pass. )

Now, the majority of the run blocking still seemed to be ZBS flavored ... but ... as long as the results against some pretty darned good defensive lines/linebackers (Cincy and Detroit) continue, I'll not do my usual railing on the ZBS.

Similarly, lots of pooh-poohing the 180+ yards rushing. Some people are hell-bent on factoring out Cobb's run -- to which I respond: "Did he take a hand off from the backfield? Was it a reverse?? YES and NO??? Well then, what in the hell are you talking about?"

Go fat guys. It helps to have bonafide running backs, right?

 

[12theTruth]

The Packers pulled a guard yesterday!!!

Hey, I'm happy as a stuck pig with the newfound emphasis on actually establishing a running game. Almost 50/50 run to pass. )

Now, the majority of the run blocking still seemed to be ZBS flavored ... but ... as long as the results against some pretty darned good defensive lines/linebackers (Cincy and Detroit) continue, I'll not do my usual railing on the ZBS.

Similarly, lots of pooh-poohing the 180+ yards rushing. Some people are hell-bent on factoring out Cobb's run -- to which I respond: "Did he take a hand off from the backfield? Was it a reverse?? YES and NO??? Well then, what in the hell are you talking about?"

Go fat guys. It helps to have bonafide running backs, right?

What belies the success the Packers are having in the running game this year? A combination of factors have converged to produce an almost 180 from the past two seasons in regards to the success of the run game vs the passing game.

While EDS is average on a good day in pass protection he is more adept in the run blocking element and seems to be a massive upgrade from Jeff Saturday. I was a big critic of the flipping of the offensive line but what has transpired is almost an energy influxion and the players have really took to their new roles and the results on the field have been most productive. James Starks brief return to health and the emergence of a REAL RB who will almost always grind for extra yardage, Eddie Lacy.

I do not have the statistics but to all the stat geeks out there, what are the percentages as to how defenses have been playing Aaron Rodgers. If they've been gearing their defenses to shut down the pass and Aaron Rodgers and taking their chances against our running game with 6 or 7 men in the box then this could go quite a ways towards helping to explain this suddenly prolific running attack.

 

[jaybadger82]

Couldn't agree more.

The run game is so important in countering the pass rush and in sustaining drives. Its continuing development can help the offense control the ball and keep the defense fresher. Ball control might be the very best defense.

 

[adambr2]

Why would anyone factor out Cobb's run? He can be a big part of our run game at times because of his explosiveness. It wouldn't be fair to factor that out just because he's not an RB.

I wouldn't take anything away from the rushing success of Philly just because they have Vick. That's part of his skill set (and risk), and therefore another big part of their run game. Same concept.

 

[JBlood]

Being able to run the ball is huge for us. And it will be even bigger when the weather turns bad. Just no more injuries. Enough already.

 

[NelsonsLongCatch]

A run game is just what the Packers needed after team's playing deep Cover-2 only all of last year. Lacy has been the perfect compliment to this offense. I just wish MM would use him more on 3rd-and-1.

 

[ARPackFan]

Packers are averaging 141 rushing yards a game which according to Pro Football Reference puts them at lucky 13 of all NFL teams. Considering where the Packers have been in the past years that's a huge improvement. I'd like to see about 7 or 8 screens a game to further slow up the pass rush.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2013/

 

[I_am_smoked_cheddar]

I just love the Packers resurrected running attack. It just gets better as the O-line gets better. Lacy is pass blocking well and improving as AR's safety valve. What does disturb me are the play calls that make me say, "DUUHH !". The plays that everyone in America is expecting as well as opposing Defences ! Make's me say, What the F**& was that ?

 

[Hjalmar Davidson]

I'm really liking this Lacy kid. He is a Beast! And hes only going to get better too. Once he gets a feel for the blocking scheme he will break into the second level of the D and watch out. I'm wondering if having Kuhn back will help as well. Cant help thinking also what if Bulaga were out there. Hmm....

 

[Oshkoshpackfan]

I am loving it as well. Just hoping they can employ Kuhn as some sort of lead blocker once in a while. Kinda like vonte leach was the road grader for the ravens ray rice. That type of hole clearing gets the job done. Just hope Kuhn has gas left in his tank if they were to start doing this.

 

[easyk83]

I have mixed feelings on Lacy, he looks good out there but he's been playing small. There is no reason for a 230 pound back with forward momentum to fall down like a house of cards when a safety tackles him. No I'm not the only one who saw that, read McGinn's grades on the Lions game.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Why would anyone factor out Cobb's run? He can be a big part of our run game at times because of his explosiveness. It wouldn't be fair to factor that out just because he's not an RB.

Right. This was not an end-around, fake kick or other gimmick padding the yards. This was a run play out of a standard set. Had Franklin not been sent to the dog house for fumbling, it might well have been him running the same play out of the same set in a change-of-pace / give Lacy a blow series.

 

[bozz_2006]

I'd like to see about 7 or 8 screens a game to further slow up the pass rush.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2013/

They ran screens this week but they weren't effective. I think we'll continue to see them. I like the potential our offense has shown so far. Good stuff. Defense needs to show up now.

 

[Shawnsta3]

Packers are averaging 141 rushing yards a game which according to Pro Football Reference puts them at lucky 13 of all NFL teams. Considering where the Packers have been in the past years that's a huge improvement. I'd like to see about 7 or 8 screens a game to further slow up the pass rush.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2013/

We are #2 in the league when it comes to yards per attempt, which is even better.

 

[13 Times Champs]

I've always said we need a running game. It is not passé as some have said on this forum.

 

[13 Times Champs]

They ran screens this week but they weren't effective. I think we'll continue to see them. I like the potential our offense has shown so far. Good stuff. Defense needs to show up now.

The defense has played pretty darn well. Gave away some garbage points to the Skins, forced 4 turnovers against Cincy and played well against the Lions.

 

[weeds]

They ran screens this week but they weren't effective. I think we'll continue to see them. I like the potential our offense has shown so far. Good stuff. Defense needs to show up now.

Yeah, the screens didn't escape my eye neither. I love screens when they're properly executed; Sherman used to pull BOTH guards and I thought it was just a thing of beauty -- if somehow the Pack could pursuade #23 to hang on to the ball...I think that kid would be killer in a screen with our two 'athletic' guards out there.

 

[RockyRaccoon]

Defense needs to show up now.

If this defense hasn't shown up yet, I can't wait to see what they look like when they do. The SF game was bad, yes, but they have played damn well since. They struggled some late in the Bengals game, but it was the offense - namely, the late fumble - that cost us that game. All in all, this defense has been significantly improved in spite of all the injuries.

I do not have the statistics but to all the stat geeks out there, what are the percentages as to how defenses have been playing Aaron Rodgers. If they've been gearing their defenses to shut down the pass and Aaron Rodgers and taking their chances against our running game with 6 or 7 men in the box then this could go quite a ways towards helping to explain this suddenly prolific running attack.

Personnel and commitment are the two biggest reasons for our improved running game.

And so what if this production is coming against light defensive fronts. If the defensive is selling out on the pass, take advantage of it. If they dare us to run, let's run it down their throats.

Then if they start bringing 8+ into the box, Mr. Rodgers & Co. will know what to do.

 

[HyponGrey]

Congrats, we're running the ball and still only at .500.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I've always said we need a running game. It is not passé as some have said on this forum.

I like having a running game but it really isn't that important in today's NFL. Last five Super Bowl champs' rushing offense league ranks:

Ravens - 11th in yards & 12th in yards/attempt
Giants - 32nd in yards & 32nd Y/A
Packers - 24th in yards & 25th in Y/A
Saints - 6th in yards & 7th in Y/A (yeah, I was surprised too)
Steelers - 23rd in yards & 29th in Y/A

Overall, only one of the past five Super Bowl champs could be considered as having a great rushing game while three were what you would call bad. Overall, just looking at five years of champs, seems like having a poor ground game is better than having a good one (not that I'm advocating that, obviously there are other factors at play).

 

[adambr2]

I have to agree with Hypon and SunshinePacker.

Don't get me wrong, I love to run the ball well, but there seems to be a bit of an obsession that we HAVE to run the ball well to be a good team.

Where has this occurred for us this year? We are running the ball better, but it hasn't improved our offense. It hasn't opened up the pass. Not yet, anyway.

I want to see evidence of a correlation between a successful running attack and winning football games. Until we see this, I'll continue to hold the new evil belief that the passing game is much more important and a Super Bowl team can sometimes get by with the Brandon Jackson's and James Starks' of the world.

 

[13 Times Champs]

I like having a running game but it really isn't that important in today's NFL. Last five Super Bowl champs' rushing offense league ranks:

Ravens - 11th in yards & 12th in yards/attempt
Giants - 32nd in yards & 32nd Y/A
Packers - 24th in yards & 25th in Y/A
Saints - 6th in yards & 7th in Y/A (yeah, I was surprised too)
Steelers - 23rd in yards & 29th in Y/A

Overall, only one of the past five Super Bowl champs could be considered as having a great rushing game while three were what you would call bad. Overall, just looking at five years of champs, seems like having a poor ground game is better than having a good one (not that I'm advocating that, obviously there are other factors at play).

Like you said other factors are at play. For example the defenses of the teams you listed in those years except maybe NO. Some of those teams are just passing teams.

And one could argue that we are still in the infancy of developing our running game plus does Mike really know how to use it in concert with the passing game?

 

[adambr2]

Like you said other factors are at play. For example the defenses of the teams you listed in those years except maybe NO. Some of those teams are just passing teams.

And one could argue that we are still in the infancy of developing our running game plus does Mike really know how to use it in concert with the passing game?

How does the fact that those teams are passing teams support an argument for the run game? It further supports the idea -- "passing attack, most important. Rushing attack, nice to have, not need to have."

I will agree on Mike needing to learn to use the running game correctly as I'd like to see Lacy utilized on short down situations more often with less downfield passing, and more downfield passing on early downs.

 

[13 Times Champs]

How does the fact that those teams are passing teams support an argument for the run game? It further supports the idea -- "passing attack, most important. Rushing attack, nice to have, not need to have."

I will agree on Mike needing to learn to use the running game correctly as I'd like to see Lacy utilized on short down situations more often with less downfield passing, and more downfield passing on early downs.

The lack of a runner can dictate that you pass. btw, those stats on Pittsburgh show a puny running game but their passing game wasn't much either. 11th in rushing the ball as the Ravens were is not all that bad either.

You could say the Saints and Ravens depended pretty heavily on the run. The examples don't present an open and shut case that the run wasn't important for those teams. Starks was very important for us at the end.

 

[adambr2]

The lack of a runner can dictate that you pass. btw, those stats on Pittsburgh show a puny running game but their passing game wasn't much either. 11th in rushing the ball as the Ravens were is not all that bad either.

You could say the Saints and Ravens depended pretty heavily on the run. The examples don't present an open and shut case that the run wasn't important for those teams. Starks was very important for us at the end.

The Saints, Packers, Giants, and Ravens won Super Bowls on the arms of Brees, Rodgers, Manning, and Flacco, not on the legs of their runners.

I'd challenge you to find the last Super Bowl winner that depended on a rushing attack over a passing attack. Trent Dilfer? It's a different age now. And teams are passing because it's a more effective way for them to move the ball, not because they can't run.