Studs Dallas

Sanguine camper

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 14, 2014
Messages
1,443
Reaction score
285
Who could've envisioned an MM team relaxing after getting a lead? His teams don't close out games. As far as Amari is concerned, please MFL don't put him on special teams anymore. They are bad enough without putting butterfingers at PR.
 

PackAttack12

R-E-L-A-X
Joined
Sep 16, 2016
Messages
6,172
Reaction score
1,759
Did the packers turn the ball over multiple times in the red zone against Dallas, cause i think THAT’S the big difference.
Rodgers played a lousy game against Detroit, but everyone else played like trash too. Yet and still, the Packers moved the ball up and down the field with little resistance. The turnovers were quite a bit of the difference. Had nothing at all to do with the design of the offense.

If receivers weren't falling down, misgauging leverage, dropping passes, or flatout running all of the wrong routes, it would've looked much different as well.

But of course some will only focus on Rodgers.

It's hilarious because almost all Rodgers supporters are capable of admitting when he doesn't play well, yet also don't absolve the rest of the team. Yet the anti-Rodgers crowd in the present day and time focuses solely on the play of the quarterback, with very little desire to highlight what other guys aren't doing properly which directly impacts how well the quarterback is actually able to play.

But the latter wants to paint the picture that the former are the irrational ones.....lol
 

captainWIMM

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
28,277
Reaction score
2,787
I've been getting gas from some here as far back as August and even last year for expressing the viewpoint that the run/pass split needed to be up closer to 50/50.

The run game most work and the offense can't put themselves in unfavorable down and distance situations for that to happen. That hasn't been the case in several games this season though.

WE ran the ball. I know that sounds really basic and it is. We have one of the best RB duos leaguewide and even #12 wanted us to run the ball. 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. This is NOT a QB you want to challenge regular with 10 in the box

You need to be aware that when Dillon and Jones average 2.95 yards a carry like they did against the Lions it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to continue to run the ball just for the sake of it.

FYI both of them hardly face 8+ defenders in the box compared to other running backs. Among 50 backs with at least 50 carries Dillon (16.22%) ranks 38th and Jones (11.45%) 46th in that category.

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.

On the other hand, the running backs averaged 3.15 yards per carry in losses to the Lions, Commanders and Jets.
 

Dantés

Gute Loot
Joined
Jan 21, 2017
Messages
11,240
Reaction score
2,172
On the other hand, the running backs averaged 3.15 yards per carry in losses to the Lions, Commanders and Jets.

Yes, BUT have you considered that Robert Tonyan is a TE and that Isaiah McDuffie wears #58??
 

gopkrs

Cheesehead
Joined
May 12, 2014
Messages
4,264
Reaction score
684
I don't know if it was said but that last play where Jarran Reed held on for dear life to Prescott's leg was a play killer. Not only was he able stop him but he brought him down for an errant pass. Tough play that he made. Showed a lot of grit and determination.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
10,390
Reaction score
3,010
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.
I don't really like that because you could basically say that about anything successful on any contest leaguewide if the team lost a game.
Just because a team recorded a loss does not give excuse to every aspect of the game being a failure. In some cases those losses would've been worse had we not run as effectively as we did.

in Buffalo it wasn't our Running game that allowed 27 points to them was it? Had our D simply prevented that quick FG before halftime that was a 7 point game on the last possession. It could've easily still been 7 differential had our ST made a long FG. I just don't put that on the Run game sorry

Against the Giants our Offense was clicking really good and our first drive of the 3rd quarter looked like this (Winning 20-13)
Pass +17
Run +3
Pass 0 INC
Run +11
Pass 0 INC
Run +2
Pass 0 INC
Pass -6 Sacked


Then the Giants go 91 yards for a TD 20-20

We go

Pass 0 INC
Pass 0 INC
Pass 0 INC



Then the Giants go 60 yards for a TD 27-20
and we get all the way to their 6 yard line needing 1 yard for a first down


1st and 10 at NYG 15
Run +7
2nd down and 3 (At the NY8)
Run +2
3rd down and 1 (At the NY6)
(knowing all along its 4 down territory and 2 Timeouts and 1:11 on gameclock to ideally burn)
Pass 0 INC
4th down and 1
Pass 0 INC (Turnover on Downs at the Giants 6 yard line)


Is there a pattern here? That doesn't sound like a team with a problem Running the ball too much and absolutely positively not a game I would say "We ran the ball and still lost". This is the narrative that's being spread and it's just abundantly false
 
Last edited:

captainWIMM

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
28,277
Reaction score
2,787
I don't really like that because you could basically say that about anything successful on any contest leaguewide if the team lost a game.
Just because a team recorded a loss does not give excuse to every aspect of the game being a failure. In some cases those losses would've been worse had we not run as effectively as we did.

in Buffalo it wasn't our Running game that allowed 27 points to them was it? Had our D simply prevented that quick FG before halftime that was a 7 point game on the last possession. It could've easily still been 7 differential had our ST made a long FG. I just don't put that on the Run game sorry

Against the Giants our Offense was clicking really good and our first drive of the 3rd quarter looked like this (Winning 20-13)
Pass +17
Run +3
Pass 0 INC
Run +11
Pass 0 INC
Run +2
Pass 0 INC
Pass -6 Sacked


Then the Giants go 91 yards for a TD 20-20

We go

Pass 0 INC
Pass 0 INC
Pass 0 INC



Then the Giants go 60 yards for a TD 27-20
and we get all the way to their 6 yard line needing 1 yard for a first down


1st and 10 at NYG 15
Run +7
2nd down and 3 (At the NY8)
Run +2
3rd down and 1 (At the NY6)
(knowing all along its 4 down territory and 2 Timeouts and 1:11 on gameclock to ideally burn)
Pass 0 INC
4th down and 1
Pass 0 INC (Turnover on Downs at the Giants 6 yard line)


Is there a pattern here? That doesn't sound like a team with a problem Running the ball too much and absolutely positively not a game I would say "We ran the ball and still lost". This is the narrative that's being spread and it's just abundantly false

The Packers running game has been excellent in several games this season, with some of them ending in losses because either MLF or Rodgers abandoned it for some reason.

On the other hand it was terrible in some games as well, significantly contributing to losses. Like against the Titans yesterday.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
10,390
Reaction score
3,010
The Packers running game has been excellent in several games this season, with some of them ending in losses because either MLF or Rodgers abandoned it for some reason.

On the other hand it was terrible in some games as well, significantly contributing to losses. Like against the Titans yesterday.
I agree. We’ve had a couple contests where we struggled. I’ll give the TN Defense credit because much of that was them. Although I still think much of our issue was them going up 2 scores in the contest.
1st half our RB’s
9 rushes 20 yards (2.22 per)
2nd Half our RB’s
9 rushes 48 yards (5.33 per)
That doesn’t sound like we were struggling in Quarters 3-4

Had our D stepped up and not let them go up 2 scores?
We could’ve ran it 20 times in the second half (107 yards) had we not been playing catch-up and largely abandoned the game plan It was understandable down 27-17 with them obliterating that clock with Henry all day.

We had 3 first half possessions!

2 of those were 3 and out. Chew on that. 3 possessions?? Kinda hard to get anything going when you have the ball 10 minutes and they have it 20 minutes. 2:1
Our D allowed 1 Tennessee possession go for over 10 minutes. Is that a season record or something? That’s called getting bled and that’s not our RB’s fault.
 
Last edited:

captainWIMM

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
28,277
Reaction score
2,787
I agree. We’ve had a couple contests where we struggled. I’ll give the TN Defense credit because much of that was them. Although I still think much of our issue was them going up 2 scores in the contest.
1st half our RB’s
9 rushes 20 yards (2.22 per)
2nd Half our RB’s
9 rushes 48 yards (5.33 per)
That doesn’t sound like we were struggling in Quarters 3-4

Once again, I have no idea where you get that numbers from. The Packers had nine rushing attempts in the first half gaining 22 yards for an average of 2.44 yards. In the second half they had 10 attempts for 34 yards (3.4 average). While they ran a ball a bit better they still struggled.
 
Top