The Ground Game?

[I_am_smoked_cheddar]

I would like to see the running attack improve. If a trade is being considered, I would hope it could be for a better back than we have seen of late. Champions are never satisfied with good enough. A balanced offence can take some of the pressure off our QB and his backside. It keeps defences more honest when they have to respect the run. Also a back that can pass block would be refreshing. A back with good hands would be a positive asset. Finaly a back with real speed that can turn the corner could be the best reason of all to take a serious look for what may be another Taylor or Anderson or Bennett or Green.

 

[SpartaChris]

While I too wouldn't mind seeing an improved running game, running back isn't a position worth trading for, especially when we haven't had training camp yet.

 

[milani]

I would like to see the running attack improve. If a trade is being considered, I would hope it could be for a better back than we have seen of late. Champions are never satisfied with good enough. A balanced offence can take some of the pressure off our QB and his backside. It keeps defences more honest when they have to respect the run. Also a back that can pass block would be refreshing. A back with good hands would be a positive asset. Finaly a back with real speed that can turn the corner could be the best reason of all to take a serious look for what may be another Taylor or Anderson or Bennett or Green.

I agree with the importance of the running game. It also uses more of the clock and wears the defense down and keeps your defense off the field. The ideal situation was when Mike Sherman had Ahman Green, Najeh Davenport, and Tony Fisher all in our backfield. You had the "take it to the house back," the pile driver, and the 3rd down pass catch and block back. Along with that he had Bubba Franks, Marco Rivera, and Mike Wahle to drive block. Throw in Clifton, Tauscher, and Flanigan and we had a couple of the best rushing seasons in Packer history. Unfortunately, other than Driver, we did not have much of a receiver corps.
We had two good running plays against the GMen last January; the very first play by Grant and a late 3rd quarter end run by Starks. Aside from that Rodgers was our running game. Go back to the 2007 championship game and our running game was limp as well.
The 9ers success last season came from playing defense and running the football. Not exactly a trademark of this Packer squad.

 

[SpartaChris]

The 9ers success last season came from playing defense and running the football. Not exactly a trademark of this Packer squad.

That's because the Niners have no one who can pass the ball.

Running hasn't been, and possibly won't ever be, the focus of this offense under Mike McCarthy, and I'm just fine with that. We'll run enough to take some pressure off, but when you have the best passer in the game, there's no need to make running the ball the focal point of your offense.

 

[ivo610]

Oh no ... Not this topic again.

The ground game is dead in the NFL. It sells tickets and makes for great highlights, but it's more or less worthless in today's NFL.

 

[SpartaChris]

Oh no ... Not this topic again.

It was only a matter of time..

 

[HyponGrey]

The Saints have a very balanced offense, a receiving cpre not unlike ours, and much better running backs (to the point Mark Ingram, a first round pick, was playing fullback). We still beat them. And from what I've seen, Saine is a decent pass blocker with decent hands. Green was brought in specifically because of his hands.

Soapbox: We could get the fastest straight line runner in the biz, and it wouldn help us. east-west not north-south.

 

[13 Times Champs]

Running game only a need if our defense doesn't improve which I think it will.

 

[Aaron rodgers is god]

It doesn't matter how we run the ball in the 1st 14 weeks. I want to be able to run the ball effectively when it comes around winter time and hopefully playoff time.

 

[Headrush]

I dont think the running game is becoming obsolete as some would have you think. I see it evolving into something that involves the RB in more of the passing game. Starks runs HARD, but he can catch the ball very well, Green can too just look at his college tape. Reports recently have Green pushing 220-225 lbs after some re-dedication in the weight room this offseason. That's a load if he's got a head of steam on a screen pass

We need to RUN BLOCK for a change. We don't need a top 10 RB. Especially if we're going to pay out big $$$ to keep 85, 52, 88 and 12 in the next year or two

 

[GreenBlood]

The Saints have a very balanced offense,

Since when? They only ran the ball 38.6% of the time. We ran it 39.6%.

 

[DevilDon]

I would like to see the running attack improve. If a trade is being considered, I would hope it could be for a better back than we have seen of late. Champions are never satisfied with good enough. A balanced offence can take some of the pressure off our QB and his backside. It keeps defences more honest when they have to respect the run. Also a back that can pass block would be refreshing. A back with good hands would be a positive asset. Finaly a back with real speed that can turn the corner could be the best reason of all to take a serious look for what may be another Taylor or Anderson or Bennett or Green.

If the Packers can find one guy to do that they had better sign him. The Packers consider every RB a pass blocker, some are better than others but they specifically look for that on tape. They don't draft a guy they don't think can do it.
Starks and Green have excellent hands, though you haven't seen it yet, keep your eyes out. They are both very good at receiving. Your turn the corner guy is Green but you have to run those plays.... Packers don't run them.
I know what you mean though, I loved the days of Bennett and Levens and Green. But it's got to suggest something to you that the brass is okay with what they got and you know they had to have looked at that last year.
Finally, I don't think it's the running game as much as the play calling. When the Packers wanted to ride out the game on the ground last year, they were for the most part effective. I cringed every time someone got the ball but they got it done.
Another prediction - the Packers RBs will get it done this year.

 

[HyponGrey]

Since when? They only ran the ball 38.6% of the time. We ran it 39.6%.

Perhaps it's better to say that they have the talent and depth to have a very balanced offense. Just as a side note that made me chuckle, that means we're 1% more balanced than they are?

 

[Bogart]

You don't win when you don't run the ball in the post season. Yeah, we live in depressing times these days, when a 9-7 team with the 32nd ranked rushing game wins the Super Bowl, but the Giants did bring it in the playoffs, running over 90 yards in each game.

I don't think I have ever seen a team win a playoff game by throwing it 50 times or more, and then rushing less than 100 yards. No way. Ground game may have disappeared from the video game style of throwing it 50 times a game, but it still matters in the playoffs. Just look at the 49ers; the run game basically carried them 90% of the time without having to constantly air it out 24/7.

Just look at Drew Brees against the Niners if you don't believe the run game matters anymore. Brees threw it 60 times for 400 yards, great stats, but the run game? Is 37 yards on the ground something to be proud of when you are so one dimensional? It's no different from 15 years ago. Dan Marino couldn't win either in the playoffs when he was throwing it 40-50 times and had barely any rushing yards.

 

[I_am_smoked_cheddar]

Bravo Bogart!!
I believe that if we had been blessed with a spectacular league leading ground attack that the bandwagon riders would cry, What need we with the pass with such a great running game? I can't pretend to know what the coaches think they have in the barn, lets hope this years gamble pays off. However gambling can be risky as we all saw in last game vs the G-men. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me!!!

 

[armand34]

The ONLY response I have to this topic (i'm guilty of bringing it up as well) is wait and see

 

[ivo610]

You don't win when you don't run the ball in the post season. Yeah, we live in depressing times these days, when a 9-7 team with the 32nd ranked rushing game wins the Super Bowl, but the Giants did bring it in the playoffs, running over 90 yards in each game.

I don't think I have ever seen a team win a playoff game by throwing it 50 times or more, and then rushing less than 100 yards. No way. Ground game may have disappeared from the video game style of throwing it 50 times a game, but it still matters in the playoffs. Just look at the 49ers; the run game basically carried them 90% of the time without having to constantly air it out 24/7.

Just look at Drew Brees against the Niners if you don't believe the run game matters anymore. Brees threw it 60 times for 400 yards, great stats, but the run game? Is 37 yards on the ground something to be proud of when you are so one dimensional? It's no different from 15 years ago. Dan Marino couldn't win either in the playoffs when he was throwing it 40-50 times and had barely any rushing yards.

You seem to be confusing passing and efficient passing. Dan Marino had a run game several years but ended up losing in the playoffs bc of turnovers. And same with drew brees. He threw 2 INTs, and that's what cost them the game. Alex smith threw none.

 

[Kitten]

We run a West Coast offense, not a lot of a ground game in the playbook. Ivo has the right of it. Look at all the elite QBs in the league today. Look at their styles and the systems they play in. The days of all star RBs the likes of Emmett Smith are gone or slowly fading. The game is changing, naturally there are going to be some people who don't like changes and who will miss the run game. But I don't see it coming back, I see it fading even further as QBs today are being built to perfect the pass.

 

[ivo610]

If you could get me a marshal faulk type running back I would be all for it. Then again we wouldn't be able to pay him.

 

[slaughter25]

I think we can all agree that we would like to see more production out of the running game this year. And I think we can also all agree to be a perfect football team you would need an All Pro caliber running back. But in reality no team is perfect and I think the packers running game is serviceable. The young guys on the team also have a lot to prove but, I think we will see Starks stay healthy and produce his first real season, if he makes that jump forward to *just staying healthy* I think the running game will be productive enough to compete for a championship.

 

[Jules]

You seem to be confusing passing and efficient passing. Dan Marino had a run game several years but ended up losing in the playoffs bc of turnovers. And same with drew brees. He threw 2 INTs, and that's what cost them the game. Alex smith threw none.

Don't you think it is at all possible that Brees threw those picks due to a lack of running game and being one dimensional on offense?

Ivory averaged 2.6 ypc and led the team that game with 23 yards on the ground. Gore averaged 6.8 ypc and had 89 yards total.

And then you throw in the Niners D (which stopped the run all year anyway) and the game was going to be on Brees anyway, his D sucked too.

Honestly, based on that game alone and then watching the Niners/Giants I am not sure at all the Packers were going to get to the SB.

 

[ivo610]

Don't you think it is at all possible that Brees threw those picks due to a lack of running game and being one dimensional on offense?

Ivory averaged 2.6 ypc and led the team that game with 23 yards on the ground. Gore averaged 6.8 ypc and had 89 yards total.

And then you throw in the Niners D (which stopped the run all year anyway) and the game was going to be on Brees anyway, his D sucked too.

Honestly, based on that game alone and then watching the Niners/Giants I am not sure at all the Packers were going to get to the SB.

No I don't. No running game and Rodgers had a pretty decent year. Didn't seem to turn the ball over all that much.

The Aints lost (never won on the road in playoffs in franchise history) bc they couldn't cover Davis. Alex smith for all his flaws doesn't turn the ball over and had his best game of his career against the Saints. And it still went down to the wire.

 

[longtimefan]

Don't you think it is at all possible that Brees threw those picks due to a lack of running game and being one dimensional on offense?

Ivory averaged 2.6 ypc and led the team that game with 23 yards on the ground. Gore averaged 6.8 ypc and had 89 yards total.

And then you throw in the Niners D (which stopped the run all year anyway) and the game was going to be on Brees anyway, his D sucked too.

Honestly, based on that game alone and then watching the Niners/Giants I am not sure at all the Packers were going to get to the SB.

So any int Favre tossed was due to lack of running game?

 

[Jules]

So any int Favre tossed was due to lack of running game?

I never said that. But, when you have to throw too many times in a game you are often doomed in the postseason.

I'm a Colts fan, we wrote the book in Indy on how to shine in the regular season and then fall apart in the playoffs every year. I have seen it far too many times...great regular season passing numbers only to fail in the playoffs. Some of it can be blamed on the QB of course or defense etc., but when you can't run the ball and you think the QB is going to bail out your entire team every single week you more then likely will not be hoisting that Lombardi in February.

Of course there were times the Colts HAD a good run game and Peyton or Tom Moore or whoever would go away from it in the playoffs for some reason I cannot explain.You look no further then the SB vs. the Saints when Addai was getting good yardage at 5.9 yards per freaking carry and then there we go again......lets air it out and chuck it until disaster happens. And it did. Peyton threw it 45 times and ran it 17 times with Addai getting 13 of the carries.

 

[I_am_smoked_cheddar]

Where have you gone Jim Taylor? A nation turns it's lonely eyes to you!