Studs Dallas

mradtke66

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
1,300
Reaction score
272
Location
Madison, WI
It's our strength in 2022 and even after this game some people will refute it. When we run the ball we lure Defenses into 10 in the box.

The biggest difference in this game is we ran successfully when it mattered. Against the Lions, we were trash. Against the Bills, their calls in the second half invited the run because it took too long and time was on their side.

I attribute our success in this game to better blocking, having a good plan (decidedly run heavy early), and the other 10 guys on offense doing their job when called upon.
 

McKnowledge

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 29, 2015
Messages
1,154
Reaction score
199
I am glad that Christian Watson finally produced, and he actually cleared those mental hurdles that all rookies must face.

You could see the confidence growing throughout the game.

I'm also proud of Aaron Rodgers for instilling confidence in the kid after those first couple drops.

Watson could've easily had a 200 yd game with 4 TDs.

This was a true breakout game.

Still disappointed in this team and organization overall, but this was a quality team win.

I was pleasantly surprised.

Packers can use this game as a foundation and keep building.
 

Dantés

Gute Loot
Joined
Jan 21, 2017
Messages
11,240
Reaction score
2,172
I have said it all season long that the running game needs to be effective for the offense to have a chance at being successful. Jones and Dillon averaging 5.49 yards a carry on a total of 37 attempts compared to only 2.95 against the Lions was the main reason the entire unit performed at a higher level this week.

The running game has been effective in other games and the offense has still flopped.

The actual key is execution of the design of the offense, with rushing effectiveness being one factor thereof.
 

melvin dangerr

In it to Win it All
Joined
Sep 9, 2012
Messages
2,734
Reaction score
453
Location
ST Croix VI
I think he was drafted to appease Cobb, who knew him fairly well, which in turn was to appease AR12, because him and Cobb are very close.

AR Fumble is Ty Montgomery 2.No!!!

Cut this fool immediately!!!
TY Montgomery OMG that guy was and epic failure I think he is working at Wendy’s now
 

mradtke66

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
1,300
Reaction score
272
Location
Madison, WI
The running game has been effective in other games and the offense has still flopped.

Which game(s) do think this matches up with?

Against the Bills, we were down 2 scores for the majority of the game and us running the ball honestly helped them.

I didn't see much difference in play calling. I didn't significant different in Rodgers' play (Lion's game excluded.) What I did see was a wide receiver, 1 in particular, holding up their/his end of the bargain.
 

Krabs

I take offense to that sir.
Joined
Nov 10, 2020
Messages
872
Reaction score
350
It is an insult. It shows we have devolved into a joke, unserious organization lacking in accountability. He should have been long gone before yesterday. He never even should have been on this team. I never, once, have felt comfortable with him back there returning punts or kicks, yet somehow this staff did? How can we all recognize his ineptitude long before these professionals? This is a harsh business, sometimes you need to be harsh. They needed to be a long time ago.

He would not have survived this long on any other team in the league. By the way, this is not new; I've been beating this drum for months, dating back to last season.
Lol, I guess take it as an insult. I really don't think the FO is trying to insult the fans by keeping a punt returner around too long. It's fairly clear that he is not up to the task during game time. We have no idea what goes on in practice. There's decent sample size now for the coaches to see that his is not a fit. However, this is not personal, or a slight to the fans. The team has made recent playoff runs, which include back to back #1 seeds. I don't think they are keeping Amari around to slap us in the face or not to be held accountable. But, you entitled to your opinion.
 

Krabs

I take offense to that sir.
Joined
Nov 10, 2020
Messages
872
Reaction score
350
I've said it before but it has often felt like we give both players and staffers WAY too long of a leash at times. It's a hard balance; I think there's some value to having a team that feels like a "family" and rallying around and supporting each other but at the same time it's a business and you have to make hard decisions to put yourself in the best position to win.

I have my gripes with him but does anyone think something like this would EVER fly under a guy like Belichick? He'd have been gone AGES ago, and I think the same is true of just about any serious contender. But we seem to give chance after chance until it really bites us in the a** before finally making a decision to move on. We were all talking for weeks if not months that we needed to move on from Drayton on ST and we didn't. In fact MLF specifically said in December that he wouldn't fire Drayton. Then of course our ST implodes in the most spectacular way to bounce us out of the playoffs and that was FINALLY enough to get him the boot. We saw with Ty Montgomery that he had to actively and directly disregard a coach's instructions and cost us the game (or at least a chance to win it) before getting kicked. I'm sure you can think of plenty of other examples...

And so it's feeling more or less the same with Amari. I guess we'll see if he's released any time soon but I don't have any confidence that he will be. Like many before him he will probably get extended chance after chance after chance until he single-handedly loses us an important game before we decide to cut ties.
All fair points. My only disagreement is that we take it as a slight to the fans. I don't take it as an insult. The team is trying to win. There's pros and cons to cutting players mid season and firing coaches mid season. I don't disagree that it could or should happen. It is a business and we are just the fans. It is not personal. The FO isn't upstairs laughing about Amari fumbling and saying "take that" to the fans. We don't have an owner and that tends to keep them from making knee jerk reactions like Irsay in Indianapolis. Anyway, it's not personal and I'm not insulted. To each their own though.
 

Schultz

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 8, 2021
Messages
1,401
Reaction score
664
They drafted him because they liked him. Had nothing to do with Cobb, yes they have a connection, but it's not why they drafted him. Going back to college he looked like a pretty decent 3rd round pick and the type of receiver we haven't had since Cobb. Since he's taken some steps back from what he looked he could do in college. I know he's sucked, but he had the right build, attributes and production in college to justify his draft position. I think people are being disingenuous saying otherwise.
I agree with everything here. I even had him in the Amish contest to go to GB in round 4. I also believe Cobb was not traded for until after the draft. Maybe they traded for Cobb to keep Amari happy.
 

mradtke66

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
1,300
Reaction score
272
Location
Madison, WI
Which game(s) do think this matches up with?

To answer my own question, since I'm currently looking:

Week 1, Vikes: Not sure how I'd call this. High YPC, but we got behind early so low carries. L
Week 2, Bears: Offense did well, High YPC, good ground yardage. Rushing offense on point, offense as a whole good. W
Week 3, Bucs: Offense did okay, running game largely shutdown, less than 3YPC, low yardage, 24 carries. W
Week 4, Pats: Offense did okay, running game did well, 4.75 YPC, 32 carries. W
Week 5, Giants: Offense below average, running game did well 4.7 YPC, but low carries. L
Week 6, Jets: Offense below average, running game contained, 3 YPC, 20 carries. L
Week 7, Commies: Offense below average, running game contained, 3.1 YPC. L
Week 8, Bills: Offensive average, running game did well, 6.7 YPC. Bill likely only playing pass defense due to their lead the majority of the game.
Week 9, Lions: Offense moved the ball at will, failed to score. Running game did average, 4.2 YPC. L
Week 10: I think we all know how that one went.

By my estimation, the only games where the running game looked good but the offense as a whole looked poor was the Giants game. But I'm open to being convinced otherwise.
 

milani

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 11, 2012
Messages
1,874
Reaction score
423
The biggest difference in this game is we ran successfully when it mattered. Against the Lions, we were trash. Against the Bills, their calls in the second half invited the run because it took too long and time was on their side.

I attribute our success in this game to better blocking, having a good plan (decidedly run heavy early), and the other 10 guys on offense doing their job when called upon.
I like using clock sometimes but too often Rodgers has had to run the play clock down and the defense knows he can no longer call something else. When teams continue to sell out to the run someone has to get open and we have to find him. It has not been to our advantage much this season.
 

mradtke66

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
1,300
Reaction score
272
Location
Madison, WI
When teams continue to sell out to the run someone has to get open and we have to find him. It has not been to our advantage much this season.
Agreed. I other than the line doing a better job, I put the success on Watson. He was a weapon and everyone did their job with the under routes.

It's almost as though providing the passing game with some weapons fixes a lot of things. . .
 

Half Empty

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 29, 2014
Messages
4,161
Reaction score
409
Agreed. I other than the line doing a better job, I put the success on Watson. He was a weapon and everyone did their job with the under routes.

It's almost as though providing the passing game with some weapons fixes a lot of things. . .
Not trying to sound the way this come across, but the passing game has been provided with those same weapons all year, right?
 

mradtke66

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
1,300
Reaction score
272
Location
Madison, WI
Not trying to sound the way this come across, but the passing game has been provided with those same weapons all year, right?

Yes and no.

A weapon isn't the same as player. Watson, (hypothetically), running the wrong route, dropping passes, running lazy routes...that's not a weapon.

Running crisp routes, getting open, finishing the job by catching the ball, and then influencing the game in a positive manner, that's a weapon.
 

Dantés

Gute Loot
Joined
Jan 21, 2017
Messages
11,240
Reaction score
2,172
Which game(s) do think this matches up with?

Against the Bills, we were down 2 scores for the majority of the game and us running the ball honestly helped them.

I didn't see much difference in play calling. I didn't significant different in Rodgers' play (Lion's game excluded.) What I did see was a wide receiver, 1 in particular, holding up their/his end of the bargain.

They ran for 6.2 YPC @MIN and Rodgers was under 6 YPA and the offense scored 7 points in a loss.

They ran for 4.7 YPC Vs. NYG in London and Rodgers was under 6.0 YPA and they scored 22 points in a loss.

They ran for 6.7 YPC @ BUF and Rodgers was under 7.0 YPA and they scored 17 points in a loss.

The point is NOT that the success of the running game is irrelevant. It most certainly is not-- it's necessary.

The point I'm making is that rushing success on its own has not been the determining factor in offensive success. Regardless of what people want to blame it on, the simple fact is that the Packers have lost games where the rushing attack was successful because the passing game was inoperable.
 

Sunshinepacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
5,454
Reaction score
629
The biggest difference in this game is we ran successfully when it mattered. Against the Lions, we were trash. Against the Bills, their calls in the second half invited the run because it took too long and time was on their side.

I attribute our success in this game to better blocking, having a good plan (decidedly run heavy early), and the other 10 guys on offense doing their job when called upon.

Uhh, having a legit threat at receiver who was able to take advantage of a defense squatting on the run was a HUGE part of the difference. Just ignoring the single largest difference on offense vs most other games this season seems odd.
 

Sunshinepacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
5,454
Reaction score
629
The running game has been effective in other games and the offense has still flopped.

The actual key is execution of the design of the offense, with rushing effectiveness being one factor thereof.
*cough* having a good receiver *cough*
 

PackerDNA

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 8, 2014
Messages
5,306
Reaction score
695
Giving a shout out to Yosh Nijman. Been high on him for a couple of years. Tremendous athleticism with his size and a great work ethic. He was pretty solid yesterday and especially did a good job against number 11.
 

Sunshinepacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
5,454
Reaction score
629
Again, an important facet but far from the whole story.

Rodgers had open receivers against Detroit and the offense was still a disaster.

Execute. The. Offense.

Did the packers turn the ball over multiple times in the red zone against Dallas, cause i think THAT’S the big difference.
 
Top