Studs and Duds: Home vs. Cincinatti

[Pokerbrat2000]

Where it looked to me where we started running the ball effectively was right up the middle or just off center. Probably the left side of center. And that without motioning a tight end and having said TE standing right behind where we are going to run the ball, thereby telling the defense where to beef up. Sometimes an extra blocker in tight quarters just gives them two more tacklers. Now running around end is different. There you should be able to sneak out one or two blockers so as to outnumber the tacklers. Same with a well executed screen pass. Imho. The bears really executed the around end last game without having to scramble for every single yard with more tacklers showing up every second. At least that's the difference I see on that end around.

I hate to say it, because it sounds cliche, but the Packers most success running the ball, is when they establish the passing game first. It was that way with Rodgers and continues to be that way with Love. The Packers don't have a good enough run blocking OL to just continually run the ball, especially when the D knows they will be running the ball.

Personally, I would like to see MLF/Love speed up the offense, go with more no huddles and quicker plays. Keep the defense from substituting and wear them down. Besides when they are in the 2 minute offense, I don't often see the play clock have 5 seconds or more on it, when the ball is snapped.

 

[mradtke66]

IN terms of total averages, double-check my math perhaps (I'm trying to rush to get this in before leaving work for the day, lol)
Season-wide totals...
Rush EPA per play = 0.00
Pass EPA per play = 0.32

No need to double check it, your results are more or less what I expected.

Our jet sweeps this year average better (0.19) than our running as a whole (0.0). And Golden averages more YPC than Jacobs. Tongue in check myself, that would imply we should run more of them vs traditional runs. (Not actually suggesting that—part of th success is likely due to using it sparingly)

 

[milani]

I hate to say it, because it sounds cliche, but the Packers most success running the ball, is when they establish the passing game first. It was that way with Rodgers and continues to be that way with Love. The Packers don't have a good enough run blocking OL to just continually run the ball, especially when the D knows they will be running the ball.

Personally, I would like to see MLF/Love speed up the offense, go with more no huddles and quicker plays. Keep the defense from substituting and wear them down. Besides when they are in the 2 minute offense, I don't often see the play clock have 5 seconds or more on it, when the ball is snapped.

Good assessment. The Patriot teams of BB did that quite often by loosening up the D and then ran the ball. Our O line is not the bulldozer we had during the days of Ahman Green, John Brockington, and Jimmy Taylor. Those teams could run even when the box was stacked.

 

[Krabs]

STUDS

Havrisik - Fools that act like it was no big deal, you have one job - kick the ball straight...will fail to understand how awesome he did in all responsibilities. He's earned a PS spot and I hope Gute gives it to him. Clutch, consistent and got the only game ball award post-game from MLF.

Agreed, dude was looking for a substitute teaching job. Signed on Saturday and kicking on Sunday is ridiculous. There was very little time for chemistry with his teammates and even less time to calm his nerves. His kicks were spot on. Nice little story.

Jacobs - Dude was sick, puking before/during/after the game....BEAST.

Love - One bad throw that was tipped to lead to only his second INT of the game...after that dude dropped some dimes that I swear were special. That 3rd and 9 throw getting plastered to Golden was SPECIAL.

The bad throw was really bad. This is my only knock on Love. He still is throwing terrible interceptions. Yes, he doesn't throw a lot of them but when he does they are dreadful. This one was on the run, across his body, and into a double team. Throw it away and we have a FG attempt.

Defense - They controlled a team with weapons and a QB that has been winning a LONG time in the NFL.

DUDS

Fanbase - We have become our worst enemies. Long term success has essentially led to a demand for perfection and the illusion that things should be easy. For sure a nuanced discussion and critiques exist - I have them personally...but DAMN this fanbase has grown ridiculous. We just saw the RAVENS score 10 points and then 3, Eagles lose twice now (once to the Giants)...Vikings BARELY beat Cleveland...Jags beat KC...... We are 3-1-1 and easily for sure should be 5-0 if it weren't for two blocked kicks....sure those 5 may have included a couple ugly wins but WINS are WINS - - - - - - - everywhere but in GB apparently.

I can't disagree with this. I have to remind people at work all the time about exactly your point. Seems winning isn't enough these days. We have to dominate or people complain. I thought they played a really good game. Even some of the throws that the corners gave up were just great plays by Chase and Higgins. Those dudes are getting paid too and are going to make plays. Wins a win and I personally thought it was a pretty good game. Keeping a team to 18 points will at the very least keep you in games. Most likely will lead you to a W.

Tom - He struggled for him...couldn't have been fully healthy but dude is a dog and kept fighting and is RT for a long time here I hope...but he had a couple reps that were BAAAAD.

Run plays - This team can cook, let Love COOK more. I would love to see MLF flip and pass 55% or more of the time instead of run that much or more consistently. I know...not his style and his style wins....a lot....but...

Run game is actually getting going. I think it will be a top run team by end of season. Hopefully, it will be peaking come playoff time.

 

[Krabs]

It's truly what all the teams we've faced have had to do (except Dallas really IMO). Teams know pressure is cooking asap with this front typically and it shows in the calls of the opposition.

I think this will lead to turnovers. I know there has been a dry spell with taking the ball away, but I think they are coming.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Hard to believe that we still have 12 games to play. The next time we face the Lions they will be primed to execute much better than the first time. Hafley could have pressed a lot more. No way Flacco was going to succeed trying to go long.

I don't know why Hafley plays so much zone, when the DL and LB groups can put so much pressure on a QB. Disrupt a WR or TE at the LOS and blow up the play before it has a chance to develop. This increases the likelihood of INTs, batted balls, and on.

I hated it when Joe Barry would have guys sit back in soft zones. With such a quick aggressive, athletic front, I don't get why Hafley doesn't play more press. If anyone can answer this, please jump in and thanks!

 

[Heyjoe4]

I think this will lead to turnovers. I know there has been a dry spell with taking the ball away, but I think they are coming.

Hey Krabs! Long time no see, welcome back!

Yeah I think the D will start creating TOs. Parsons has truly shaken up the planning of opponents. He just hasn't had enough time in the system yet to be of maximum value - and he's still playing great and elevating the guys around him. This D is good and will get better, including take aways.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I don't know why Hafley plays so much zone, when the DL and LB groups can put so much pressure on a QB.

My guess is this. Our DB and ILB group is not as good as we would like to think it, at covering receivers. I think we saw Flacco and the Bengals expose that weakness on Sunday. I can't imagine that the Cardinals won't try the exact same thing this Sunday. It will be Hafley's job to figure out just how to counter that move. Maybe lots of run blitzes? He might have to bring one of those DB's in and blitz them as well. Not sure what he will do, but rushing just 4, isn't going to get the job done.

 

[mradtke66]

I don't know why Hafley plays so much zone, when the DL and LB groups can put so much pressure on a QB.

I think he's really worried about our CBs. I too would like more press or other disruption approaches, but Hobbs hasn't played a lot (and hasn't looked like world beater when he has) and then we have a lot of UDFA and young kids behind him. I hope that as the season goes on and the group gets more experience playing together, there is enough trust to challenge more receivers at the line.

 

[milani]

I don't know why Hafley plays so much zone, when the DL and LB groups can put so much pressure on a QB. Disrupt a WR or TE at the LOS and blow up the play before it has a chance to develop. This increases the likelihood of INTs, batted balls, and on.

I hated it when Joe Barry would have guys sit back in soft zones. With such a quick aggressive, athletic front, I don't get why Hafley doesn't play more press. If anyone can answer this, please jump in and thanks!

Did he play that kind of defense when he coached in college?

 

[lambeaulambo]

Wow. Stud and Duds has turned into a lot of good observations.

 

[Heyjoe4]

I think he's really worried about our CBs. I too would like more press or other disruption approaches, but Hobbs hasn't played a lot (and hasn't looked like world beater when he has) and then we have a lot of UDFA and young kids behind him. I hope that as the season goes on and the group gets more experience playing together, there is enough trust to challenge more receivers at the line.

Good explanation. Hobbs has been a big disappointment so far, especially given his contract. There is still a lot of time for that to change, but his play and injury history are a concern.

And yeah, behind a group of starters, there isn't much depth. The press play I'm advocating would take athleticism and solid understanding of the position. It can be risky to jump a route, and it's nearly impossible to do that in zone.

Thanks for the insight. Very helpful.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Wow. Stud and Duds has turned into a lot of good observations.

Ya just never know what's gonna happen on here LL! This has been an egoless thread, with people more interested in asking and answering good questions than picking apart a reply.

It's nice to see.

 

[tynimiller]

I hope anyone who continues to downplay winning in the NFL continue to observe the entire league….folks pretending like we should have destroyed the Bengals like they were an area high school team and pissed about our game with them…..you watch last night?

Fact is it is FREAKING HARD to win games in the NFL. We are mere two blocked kicks from being undefeated but that is dismissed by many….yet then I hear those same people moan about how good Arizona is as they’ve barely lost and could easily be undefeated….

Ignorance illustrated.

There is a reason why with Burrow the Bengals are one of the better teams….and if Flacco plays like that they’ll claw back into the division easily.

Fact is this is gonna be a TOUGH year and I still think the #1 seed on each side is likely to have four or more losses.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I hope anyone who continues to downplay winning in the NFL continue to observe the entire league….folks pretending like we should have destroyed the Bengals like they were an area high school team and pissed about our game with them…..you watch last night?

While I also believe that "on any given Sunday"....any team can win. That said, the Bengals were at home last night, as were the Packers last Sunday. I think most fan mentality is that a good team wins home games, especially against a 2-3 team, playing a backup QB.

I am not debating any of your points, since they are valid. That said, nothing wrong with fans discussing ways that the Packers can improve, which often can come off as "b*itching".

All that said, I sometimes wonder how the current Packer team would be with a Joe Flacco at QB. I do like Jordan Love, but he definitely needs to become a better game manager.

 

[Magooch]

I am not debating any of your points, since they are valid. That said, nothing wrong with fans discussing ways that the Packers can improve, which often can come off as "b*itching".

That's where I'm at, it doesn't have to be so black and white. We can say "it's hard to win in this league, wins shouldn't be taken for granted, you don't get any style points, any win is worth celebrating" and so on...and we can also say "but we should have done XYZ better" or "we didn't play particularly well and it was closer than it needed to be" or "if we played sharper we would have put them away sooner" and so on.

Because I mean, the alternative is to just take everything exactly for what it is and say "we won the game, so there's nothing to critique here, no room for improvement," which obviously sounds ridiculous

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

That's where I'm at, it doesn't have to be so black and white. We can say "it's hard to win in this league, wins shouldn't be taken for granted, you don't get any style points, any win is worth celebrating" and so on...and we can also say "but we should have done XYZ better" or "we didn't play particularly well and it was closer than it needed to be" or "if we played sharper we would have put them away sooner" and so on.

Because I mean, the alternative is to just take everything exactly for what it is and say "we won the game, so there's nothing to critique here, no room for improvement," which obviously sounds ridiculous

Yes and I am sure he will answer, but I am pretty sure that @tynimiller was referring more to the Chicken Littles of The Packer fan base. Those that think the Packers suck, unless they win every game by a margin that makes them comfortable.

Win, lose or tie, I get entertainment from every game that I watch. It is more fun to win, but it isn't going to make me jump off a building or have an aneurism if the Packers lose.

 

[DoURant]

The Bengals needed a Joe Flacco, with Burrow out. If you take the 1st half out vs the Packers, he has led them to over 50 pts in 6 quarters. The Bengals have talent, but the saying goes, every team needs a QB to win in this league. Tge offense was dreadful before he got there. Flacco led his team, on a short week, to a division win over the 1st place team, who had only 1 loss.

 

[tynimiller]

That's where I'm at, it doesn't have to be so black and white. We can say "it's hard to win in this league, wins shouldn't be taken for granted, you don't get any style points, any win is worth celebrating" and so on...and we can also say "but we should have done XYZ better" or "we didn't play particularly well and it was closer than it needed to be" or "if we played sharper we would have put them away sooner" and so on.

Because I mean, the alternative is to just take everything exactly for what it is and say "we won the game, so there's nothing to critique here, no room for improvement," which obviously sounds ridiculous

My post wasn’t directed at many here but sure some, if someone read my comment and felt attacked, you may be one of them - but everyone here knows I’ll throw shade when shade is due, I’ll point out issues where I see em - that isn’t the type of commenting I was critiquing.

 

[tynimiller]

Yes and I am sure he will answer, but I am pretty sure that @tynimiller was referring more to the Chicken Littles of The Packer fan base. Those that think the Packers suck, unless they win every game by a margin that makes them comfortable.

Win, lose or tie, I get entertainment from every game that I watch. It is more fun to win, but it isn't going to make me jump off a building or have an aneurism if the Packers lose.

Correct. To be fair the IQ level of this board is much higher than many places that GB fans congregate…sure some here can have their bubble in their level a little off center but most aren’t too bad lol

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

The Bengals needed a Joe Flacco, with Burrow out. If you take the 1st half out vs the Packers, he has led them to over 50 pts in 6 quarters. The Bengals have talent, but the saying goes, every team needs a QB to win in this league. Tge offense was dreadful before he got there. Flacco led his team, on a short week, to a division win over the 1st place team, who had only 1 loss.

The Bengals may wonder why they are paying Burrows so much.

We see this almost every season. A high paid star QB goes down and then an old Vet steps in and plays pretty darn good. Makes me wonder if maybe there is something to not paying a QB $70M/year and just go with a $10M/year proven vet, or in the case of the Bengals and Flacco, $1.3M.

 

[SudsMcBucky]

The Bengals may wonder why they are paying Burrows so much.

We see this almost every season. A high paid star QB goes down and then an old Vet steps in and plays pretty darn good. Makes me wonder if maybe there is something to not paying a QB $70M/year and just go with a $10M/year proven vet, or in the case of the Bengals and Flacco, $1.3M.

Many people have thought about this. The biggest problem is you have to have a GM in place with jinormous cojones to let a really good QB go and keep going out to get lower-priced options. I always thought Purdy would be the first test case in this type of situation. I thought when his contract came up and was due for major bucks, that's where Lynch would slide in a competent lower-priced vet. And yet, even that didn't happen.

 

[Magooch]

Yes and I am sure he will answer, but I am pretty sure that @tynimiller was referring more to the Chicken Littles of The Packer fan base. Those that think the Packers suck, unless they win every game by a margin that makes them comfortable.

Win, lose or tie, I get entertainment from every game that I watch. It is more fun to win, but it isn't going to make me jump off a building or have an aneurism if the Packers lose.

Yep no doubt, and at the end of the day it IS still "just" a game and it's supposed to be fun. If we're not having fun with it, what's the point? The day the game stops being fun for me to watch, win or lose, I'll find something better to do with my time. No reason to make ourselves miserable otherwise!

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I always thought Purdy would be the first test case in this type of situation. I thought when his contract came up and was due for major bucks, that's where Lynch would slide in a competent lower-priced vet. And yet, even that didn't happen.

Meanwhile, Purdy gets hurt and Patriots castoff QB Mac Jones steps in and seems to be playing pretty well.

Vikings 1st round pick JJ McCarthy goes down and Carson Wentz steps in and does ok.

Steelers pickup A-Rod and they are humming along.

Even Baker Mayfield has found his footing with the Buccaneers.

I do hope Love works out, but I always wonder if he hadn't been drafted, just where this team would be today. Obviously, that means either another QB or Rodgers is guiding them. Rodgers on a $14M deal probably wouldn't be the case, but I doubt had he stayed, he would be getting the kind of money that Love is.

 

[milani]

Good explanation. Hobbs has been a big disappointment so far, especially given his contract. There is still a lot of time for that to change, but his play and injury history are a concern.

And yeah, behind a group of starters, there isn't much depth. The press play I'm advocating would take athleticism and solid understanding of the position. It can be risky to jump a route, and it's nearly impossible to do that in zone.

Thanks for the insight. Very helpful.

And we are going to face some better passing offenses the rest of the way.