We are who we are

[warhawk]

and I don't see any reason to doubt it or change it.

The game is about asserting your teams strengths against your opponents weaknesses.

1) Our offensive line has been very good at pass protection and getting better. Much better than run blocking.
2) We have better skill players at wide receiver than we do at RB.
3) Our QB is a veteran who can read the defense at the line and make adjustments (which this offense lives by) as well as anyone playing the game.

Now I know we will need to be able to run the ball. There were actually signs we could do this yesterday. So why didn't we do it? I think the answers simple.

As much success as Favre had getting it to the receivers San Diego basically refused to adjust. They put seven guys up in there and they are a talented group but they can't defend the pass as well as the run. They can PRESSURE the QB well from that package but we stuffed that part of their plan for the most part.

To their credit they stayed in the gameplan but to our credit so did we. We gave the ball to our RB's eleven times (Favre carried it two more times) but when he was at the line he saw what it would take to run a successful play.

More often than not that meant getting it to a receiver.

IF our being successful with this ultimately causes defenses to back off and defend the pass I think you will see Favre handing it off more.

Until then, I'm as happy as a pig in brown stuff doing it just the way they are.

 

[Bertram]

they are who we thought they were...
- Denny Green

lol

it is what it is
- Ted Thompson

 

[bozz_2006]

i think we should let 'em off the hook.

 

[Bertram]

sorry for destroying your otherwise good thread warhawk

 

[warhawk]

sorry for destroying your otherwise good thread warhawk

I actually got a kick out of it myself. No worries.

I just saw where some are fretting the lack of run yards and there was a reason for not putting it in the RB's hands more than because it just didn't work. I actually saw a push in the right direction on some run plays that leads me to believe we could have run it some.

The bigger question in this game may be why San Diego didn't do the same thing. They ran it like 23 times for nothin' and Rivers was completing 75% of his passes.

I bet they wish they had about 12 of those running plays back to do something else with today.

 

[MassPackersFan]

The numbers don't show it but our run blocking IS gradually improving through the first three games. I see more holes and opportunities now. Will we ever use it is the question.

 

[agopackgo4]

If we could only get that running game going! The pass game should be pretty good now, that Jennings is back, hopefully we can stay healthy!

 

[warhawk]

Not that I profess to be a genius by any means but if you read MM's interview transcripts from today he basically mirror imaged what I said here.

We passed the ball as much as we did Sunday because that's what their 3-4 defense gave us.

Getting Jennings back added to the talent level at that position.

This gameplan gave us the best chance to win. I really don't count this as a game we COULD NOT run the ball. More accurate is this was a game we chose NOT to run it much because the plan for the game was working.

 

[NJPackFan]

I have to agree with most of those points. The pass protection yesterday was absolutely tremendous. I think the running game will come along, hopefully making strides against the Vikings. I'm expecting at least a hundred yards on the ground against Minny and I also think that once Morency gets back, we will see a definite improvement on the ground.

 

[all about da packers]

If you wanna crown 'em, go ahead and crown 'em., warhawk. (Slaps water bottle) :wink:

To be honest, I wonder how much of the run struggles are due to having a rookie FB, one that hasn't played the position a long at that.

The positive is that there seems to be some more lanes opening each and every week. I'll take that. op:

 

[bozz_2006]

...I remember the first time i was crowned....