What did we learn in Week 2?

OP
OP
GreenBlood

GreenBlood

Banned
Banned
Joined
Aug 9, 2008
Messages
1,705
Reaction score
251
Post #90 pretty much sums up the entire arguement about why a running play was appropriate.

And BTW, you didn't provide stats showing that the Packers can't run when a team knows they're going to run. All you did was list the yardage of the next three rushing plays. If that's statistical proof, you need to go back to stats class.

Oh, so you DO think we could have run out the clock by running every play... even though we tried that and failed. :rolleyes:
 
OP
OP
GreenBlood

GreenBlood

Banned
Banned
Joined
Aug 9, 2008
Messages
1,705
Reaction score
251
I didn't "bail". I just realized that no matter how many times I tried to focus on the conversation on one single play of one single game, you'd keep expanding the discussion. Once again, I was talking apples and you were talking giraffes. There was not point in continuing a discussion that was going to continually go off subject.

I disagree with everything you said. Anybody who's played football or has been around football knows you need to get the clock running. A team cannot score with 00:00 on the clock after four quarters. Not to mention, the Packers defense kept the Bears on their own side of the 50 the entire game. It is unreasonable to believe that the Bears would all of a sudden be able to put together three 70-80 yard drives in seven minutes. A run play, whether the Bears knew it was coming or not, was the correct call on first down.

I played my 7 years of football, so get off your high horse already. Anybody who's played football or has been around football knows that if the play isn't there, the QB has the option of SLIDING to keep the clock running. Also, NFL history is full of games where the team that was behind was able to score 3 TDs in the final quarter.

And even if you subscribe to the idea that MM made the "wrong call" that still doesn't make it his fault that Rodgers failed to recognize that he should have run for whatever he could get and slide before going out of bounds.
 
OP
OP
GreenBlood

GreenBlood

Banned
Banned
Joined
Aug 9, 2008
Messages
1,705
Reaction score
251
Benson averaged 4.1 yards per carry in that game. 4 x's 3 is 12. 12 yards gets you a first down.

Then why didn't that work on the following possession? I

He averaged 4.1 yards per carry when the Bears still had to respect the pass! You claimed to have been around football. Tell me, what do you do as a defense when you know the offense is 90% likely to run? You stack the line. If you're the offense, how do you keep them from doing that? Hint: it's not by running yet again.
 
OP
OP
GreenBlood

GreenBlood

Banned
Banned
Joined
Aug 9, 2008
Messages
1,705
Reaction score
251
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Damn statistics! :p

We tied on the following possession and ended up with -1 yards.

Damn facts!:geek:

BTW, you can disagree with that all you want, but disagreeing with irrefutable facts doesn't make one look very bright. Look at the game log if you think it's not true.
 

NelsonsLongCatch

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 7, 2008
Messages
2,808
Reaction score
270
Location
Chi-Town
We tied on the following possession and ended up with -1 yards.

Damn facts!:geek:

BTW, you can disagree with that all you want, but disagreeing with irrefutable facts doesn't make one look very bright. Look at the game log if you think it's not true.

What "irrefutabl facts"? In your eyes, your facts are irrefutable, but mine aren't real. The Packers averaged 3.8 yards per carry... Benson averaged 4.1 yards per carry. Those are FACTS. You are beyond ridiculous.
 

NelsonsLongCatch

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 7, 2008
Messages
2,808
Reaction score
270
Location
Chi-Town
Then why didn't that work on the following possession? I

He averaged 4.1 yards per carry when the Bears still had to respect the pass! You claimed to have been around football. Tell me, what do you do as a defense when you know the offense is 90% likely to run? You stack the line. If you're the offense, how do you keep them from doing that? Hint: it's not by running yet again.

Vince Lombardi always said that if you run the play to perfection the defense won't be able to stop it. :tup:

You're arguement holds no water. Cedric Benson's last run before the interception (which was on first down) was for 6 yards. Again, just stating FACTS.
 

MLB

Cheesehead
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
53
Reaction score
8
It's fine if the Bears "bottle up the run". You're up 20 with seven minutes left. You call halfback dive three times and take two full minutes off the clock. The Bears now have the ball down 20 with five minutes to go and need to drive 70 or 80 yards for a TD. An incomplete pass stops the clock and an interception kills field position. A simple run was the correct call.

100% correct!
 
OP
OP
GreenBlood

GreenBlood

Banned
Banned
Joined
Aug 9, 2008
Messages
1,705
Reaction score
251
What "irrefutabl facts"? In your eyes, your facts are irrefutable, but mine aren't real. The Packers averaged 3.8 yards per carry... Benson averaged 4.1 yards per carry. Those are FACTS. You are beyond ridiculous.

I never said he didn't. I said most of those yards came when we were mixing up the offense.

Are you telling me that it is not a FACT that we rushed for -1 yards on the next possession after the INT? You go to the game log and look at that possession and then tell me again we didn't have -1 on 3 carries.
 
OP
OP
GreenBlood

GreenBlood

Banned
Banned
Joined
Aug 9, 2008
Messages
1,705
Reaction score
251
100% correct!

The real point here is regardless of what you deem to be the "correct" call. MM is not responsible for that INT because Rodgers had the option of sliding if his man wasn't wide open, did he not?
 
OP
OP
GreenBlood

GreenBlood

Banned
Banned
Joined
Aug 9, 2008
Messages
1,705
Reaction score
251
Vince Lombardi always said that if you run the play to perfection the defense won't be able to stop it. :tup:

You just made my point. If Rodgers and Jones had run the play to perfection, there would have been no INT. It's MM's fault that they didn't any more than it was Vince's fault when Jim Taylor lost a fumble.

You're arguement holds no water. Cedric Benson's last run before the interception (which was on first down) was for 6 yards. Again, just stating FACTS.

Yes, and you know why? Because it was the first play of the 4th quarter and the threat of a pass play prevented the Bears from stacking the line.

The real issue here is that of MM's culpability for that INT, and given the options Rodgers had, he bears none.
 

Oshkoshpackfan

YUT !!!
Joined
Aug 14, 2012
Messages
3,286
Reaction score
260
Location
Camp Lejeune NC
Sorry, but I don't usually agree with Greenblood, but......after that series of 3 consecutive runs that got stuffed for negative yardage, I too would have to go to a pass attack to keep the clock going. I my self played 13 years of football and now have coached my sons team for 6 years. I wouldn't have run that ball 3 times for negative yards. I say a screen pass would have been my 2nd play. 1st = draw, 2nd=screen( strong side) 3rd= sweep run....but that's just me.
 

Oshkoshpackfan

YUT !!!
Joined
Aug 14, 2012
Messages
3,286
Reaction score
260
Location
Camp Lejeune NC

Crash_override

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 15, 2011
Messages
8
Reaction score
1
We learned the Pack needs to run the ball to st up the passing game more. The fact that defenses had an offseason has made it harder to line up in 5WR and sling it. Rodgers and CO still have the magic, it's just harder when defenses are more prepared and know what to expect.We need a 2010 season from the D.
 
OP
OP
GreenBlood

GreenBlood

Banned
Banned
Joined
Aug 9, 2008
Messages
1,705
Reaction score
251
With that said..Can we stop the arguing? I already locked one thread because of the constant bickering..

There's really no need to micro-manage. We're all big boys here. If debate isn't allowed, what's the point of having a forum at all?
 

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
We learned the Pack needs to run the ball to st up the passing game more.
I disagree. The Packers under McCarthy and with their current OL will never be a "run to set up the pass" team and they shouldn't be. IMO the Packers have to run the ball enough, and effectively enough so the threat of a run keeps Ds from launching all-out pass rushes throughout the game.

I do agree the Packers have to account for the fact other teams had a full off season to study their prolific passing offense from last year. The more teams play a Tampa 2 look against them, the more I think the Packers should revert more of a WCO scheme, taking advantage of the underneath routes and relying more on YAC. If they play the 49ers again I'll bet that's a significant part of the game plan on O.
 

HyponGrey

Caseus Locutus Est
Joined
Mar 18, 2012
Messages
3,758
Reaction score
221
Location
South Jersey
We learned the Pack needs to run the ball to st up the passing game more. The fact that defenses had an offseason has made it harder to line up in 5WR and sling it. Rodgers and CO still have the magic, it's just harder when defenses are more prepared and know what to expect.We need a 2010 season from the D.
Pretty sure we do the exact opposite and use the pass to set up the run. Pretty sure they expected the pass in '11 too, didn't stop "The Magic". Not exactly sure about "The Magic" either this season, you don't "magically" drop a pass...
 

Members online

No members online now.

Latest posts

Top