1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!

    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers. You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
    Dismiss Notice

To all of you who said "you can't win a title in the nfl without a running game..."

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by Packerfury, Feb 7, 2011.

  1. Packerfury

    Packerfury Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2009
    Messages:
    125
    Ratings:
    +18
    Well? Come on. I heard it all year as I know some others as well as I have said that a running game just isn't a necessity anymore. It's nice. It's cool. But it isn't a need. It CAN win games, but you don't need one in order to. If any game has ever proved that,it is this one. The steelers ran all over us for 126 yards and we gained 50. So please please please, come tell me and all others how important the running game is in the NFL...
     
  2. VersusTheMoose

    VersusTheMoose Canadian Packer Fan

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2011
    Messages:
    1,353
    Ratings:
    +166
    Proved a lot of people wrong. It is important and blah blah blah, but this game and season was won through the air and on defense.
     
  3. Murgen

    Murgen MechaPackzilla

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2007
    Messages:
    3,288
    Ratings:
    +585
    When you got an Aaron Rodgers throwing the ball and 4 good WRs you can get away with not having the greatest running game. Steelers running game I think got them back into the game but it just wasn't enough.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Mr. StyleZ

    Mr. StyleZ Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    1,760
    Ratings:
    +376
    To be fair, we needed the run game to beat the Eagles.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Wood Chipper

    Wood Chipper Fantasy Football Guru

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2010
    Messages:
    4,169
    Ratings:
    +1,422
    yeah the run game was a boost against chicago and philly
     
  6. packerfan4ever

    packerfan4ever Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2005
    Messages:
    1,067
    Ratings:
    +53
    a run game is important but you play to the opponents weakness, and that is what we did,d-line played great ahh whole team played great even though we didn't run much it was enough.
     
  7. Bogart

    Bogart Duke Mantee

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2011
    Messages:
    2,551
    Ratings:
    +871
    Actually, you can't win a title without a passing game.
     
  8. 98Redbird

    98Redbird Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2010
    Messages:
    806
    Ratings:
    +240
    I'm pretty sure we had a run game, or at least a resemblance of one this post season. His name was James Starks. He averaged 4.0 yards a carry in the post season and had more yards than anyone, second was Mendenhall. Granted we played more games than everyone in the playoffs, but 4.0 YPC is at least a run game that needs to be respected.

    He had some big runs this post season. Had one on the last Packer drive of the season in fact against the Steelers.

    And without Starks, I don't know that we win that Philly game. Just being honest.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  9. NelsonsLongCatch

    NelsonsLongCatch Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2008
    Messages:
    2,697
    Ratings:
    +850
    THANK YOU.

    Apparently PackerFury didn't watch the Philly game where Starks controled the game and racked up 120+ yards.

    The play-action pass worked extremely well against Atlanta and Chicago, but I guess Starks had nothing to do with that either.

    PF didn't watch the fourth quarter of the Super Bowl either where Starks averaged 4.7 yards a carry and had a HUGE 14 yard run on the final drive.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  10. Packerfury

    Packerfury Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2009
    Messages:
    125
    Ratings:
    +18
    Jenninfslongcatch you are just pissed because you were flat out wrong. We proved to the whole world a run game is not even close to necessary. What's needed is an elite qb and a good defense. Anyone who thinks you need anything else to win a title is a moron and won't look at the facts. Maybe you missed the superbowl. Calling what we have a "running game" is like saying jamarcus russel had a successful career. If you look up our running plays in the playbook, they are probably called "keep the defense honest." There's a reason that when we need points, we give the ball to rodgers. We can run because we can pass. The patriots do the same thing. Teams are so up on playing the spread, when we run, they run well. Also, James Starks isn't that good. Ya, I said it. He's okay. He'll put up numbers in this offense, but that's because of what Rodgers does in the air.
     
  11. Jess

    Jess Movement!

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2009
    Messages:
    3,118
    Ratings:
    +473
    The 2000 Baltimore Ravens would like a word with you.
     
  12. armand34

    armand34 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 24, 2010
    Messages:
    1,920
    Ratings:
    +298
    the only team that could get away w/ not having a consistent rushing attack is the Green Bay Packers...it's been the mantra all season...which only makes Aaron Rodgers job so much harder...Aaron Rodgers & a good group w/ protection is very tough to beat...it was kind of a phenomenon as to how successful they were being NEARLY one-dimensional the whole game...but w/o Rodgers it would never happen
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Packman Chant

    Packman Chant Lambeau West

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2010
    Messages:
    242
    Ratings:
    +22
    I do think you need it, if you think about it they had to prepare for it seeing how well we did against the eagles and bears...not having many yards doesnt mean the run didnt help the pass which won us the game. We all know that the run opens up the pass, and the few yards we did have were explosive enough to keep them guessing. I do get what your saying though. when you give the packers a run and pass game though, that play action comes out and OMG its magic! We cant be stopped.
     
  14. Ausnadian

    Ausnadian Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2011
    Messages:
    218
    Ratings:
    +40
    Well, if every team doesn't just fire their ground attack because the Packers won with a throw first offense.

    Our O line played extremely well, and the Steelers secondary has room for improvement. If either of these were different the Packers game plan would have been a lot harder to achieve, and a running game would be extremely important to open up play action. Although I know deep down you know this, as any football fan should.
     
  15. net

    net Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2005
    Messages:
    980
    Ratings:
    +86
    Sorry, don't really care if you think you don't need a running game. You do. And the Packers did. Starks had 52 yards. Why not ask McCarthy if he wants a running game? He has said all along you need BALANCE. Why have running backs? Because if you don't at least have the THREAT of a running game, they simply put 6 defensive backs out there and your offense is toast.
    Anyone who thinks you don't need a running attack is fooling themselves and the Packers will find that out next season. The D-Coordinators will stop the passing attack eventually, then, what...? You kick 65 yard field goals? You have a deadly accurate passer and at least two outstanding receivers. But to simply say you don't need to run the ball is really, really dumb. There isn't a reputable coach in any league that would say that. Good example is the Detroit game. Detroit took away the passing game, and the running game never got going....and look where it ended up...the Packers last loss this season.
    The Packers didn't need to emphasize the run in THIS GAME. But they will need to improve the run game in 2011.
    Sorry, but your reasoning is flawed.
     
  16. Aaron rodgers is god

    Aaron rodgers is god Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2009
    Messages:
    786
    Ratings:
    +154
    When we played the steelers in 2009 we didn't run the ball because of the matchup. If we feel we can run on the opposing team we will run the ball more often. If we see a flaw in their secondary we will pass it more. It's all about matchups. Running game allows aaron rodgers to do so much more in the passing game.
     
  17. arrimike

    arrimike Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2010
    Messages:
    76
    Ratings:
    +12
    I agree with the statement that we can run becuase we can pass... Most of the time teams set up the run so they can pass the ball... Here, we just don't know it, but we set up the running game in the fourth with our passing game... That final drive, Pitts. was getting torn up in the air... So then their gameplan changed dramatically to play against the pass heavy, allowing Starks to get those huge holes... It also seems that the run game was essential against the Eagles, but i don't really know about that... Eagles were playing against the pass and when we noticed that they were giving us big holes, we just kept running... Again, another instance were the passing game setup the running game.
     
  18. PFanCan

    PFanCan That's MISTER Cheesehead, to you.

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2009
    Messages:
    1,880
    Ratings:
    +1,232
    Hypotheticals and debate aside, I will be very happy when a healthy Grant runs for 1000+ yards next season.
     
  19. AmishMafia

    AmishMafia Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,975
    Ratings:
    +2,226
    I have trouble with trying to make these generalizations about what you do and don't need. Football is so complex and there are many strategies to employ.

    An effective running game is just another tool in the tool box with which to utilize in the task of winning NFL football games. An effective run game helps, I don't think anyone will argue that. If you don't have one, you better have some excellent other tools that can compensate.
     
  20. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    16,590
    Ratings:
    +4,273
    the two most important things are passing defense and passing offense. In that order. You can have short passes to keep the defense "honest" and set up the deep pass. I think we had the 2nd lowest rushing yards in the SB for someone who won (I heard this over the tv after the game at a bar so I might have misheard part of that)
     
  21. cakoski

    cakoski Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    29
    Ratings:
    +5
    We do not have a good running game. If we did Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, or Chicago does not get the ball back in under 2 minutes in the 4th. I expect improving the running game is something TT and MM will address in the off season. But this does prove you can win a title with a poor running game it just a lot harder. And remember the 1982 49ers only gained around 800 yards all season from their running game.
     
  22. armand34

    armand34 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 24, 2010
    Messages:
    1,920
    Ratings:
    +298
    you can't attack a great run d w/ a weak rushing attack...you attack the weakness of the team's defense
     
  23. Kitten

    Kitten Feline Cheesehead Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2010
    Messages:
    5,112
    Ratings:
    +1,442
    Starks might have something to say to that! We didn't have what most people would consider a running game but we had enough of one to make a difference! That running game, call it what you will, was enough to help our O line and ultimately help the Packers win the SB!
     
  24. Pegger Packer

    Pegger Packer Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2010
    Messages:
    378
    Ratings:
    +114
    Yep, that 14 yard run was ABSOLUTELY GINORMOUS! It still stands out as one of the greatest moments in the game, as I knew all we needed to do at that point is run down the clock.

    While we didn't rely on our running game, i'm real happy that Starks showed up when we called on him.
     
  25. GreenBlood

    GreenBlood Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Messages:
    1,705
    Ratings:
    +652
    The premise of this thread is erroneous. We DO have a running game. We simply don't use it much. Starks put up about 5 yards per carry... enough to keep the defense honest and that's all we happen to need it for. But without that running game, even though we used is sparingly, passing becomes more difficult and half of our playbook goes out the window without credible play action.
     
    • Like Like x 3

Share This Page