dhpackr
Cheesehead
i think it is more like 75 rushes in 4 games. 1 is by the punter, i think DD has 1 and brett has a bunch.
Why worry about the running game?
- Thread starter tromadz
- Start date
i think it is more like 75 rushes in 4 games. 1 is by the punter, i think DD has 1 and brett has a bunch.
warhawk
Cheesehead
I think there is a whole lot more to this than technique or the personnel or how good the RB's are. I am not saying in anyway that this is easy correct and there's nothing there to worry about.
To this point MM has used pass first personnel and schemes in his game plan going in. I have pointed out several times WHY he has chosen to do this.
He has NOT won these last 4 games with a base package that includes FB, RB, and, TE, which happens to be the package a team can expect to generate a run game out of.
I KNOW you can run the ball out of other formations but a true, consistant run game comes out of this base package. When Green was getting all of those 100 yard games he had a FB in front of him and a TE in to block. That's how it works.
THE PROBLEM IS that to this point MM has not felt comfortable with this because your FB and RB have got to be able to do ALL of the things in the playbook well so that teams DON'T KNOW if your running it, passing it, screening it, or, swinging it to either back.
QUESTION. Would the Green Bay Packers be 4-0 right now if MM had come out in the first game with a base package like we did when we had Green and Henderson in the past? The answer is not no. It's HELL no.
You can talk technique all day but even if the technique isn't just right when we put two backs in there and run left there are defensive bodies flying all over the place and guys coming down the line from behind the play. THERE'S NO WHERE TO GO. The question is why?
The answer is this as far as I see. Until MM puts his base package on the field and runs his entire playbook out of it and says "stop this" vs. using it very sparingly I don't see how we're going to get a lot of running yards.
The REAL problem is that we have not found a way to get yards on the ground out of our pass formations with a back in there when the defense is thinking pass. I don't know if the ZBS is the best way to go when your in a one back formation and passing most the time.
I think it works better with a FB and TE in there yet the defense has to be prepared for run OR pass. It has worked for Denver and Atlanta but they don't run out of the formations we line up in 90% of the time.
That's why I don't think this is a technique issue.
To this point MM has used pass first personnel and schemes in his game plan going in. I have pointed out several times WHY he has chosen to do this.
He has NOT won these last 4 games with a base package that includes FB, RB, and, TE, which happens to be the package a team can expect to generate a run game out of.
I KNOW you can run the ball out of other formations but a true, consistant run game comes out of this base package. When Green was getting all of those 100 yard games he had a FB in front of him and a TE in to block. That's how it works.
THE PROBLEM IS that to this point MM has not felt comfortable with this because your FB and RB have got to be able to do ALL of the things in the playbook well so that teams DON'T KNOW if your running it, passing it, screening it, or, swinging it to either back.
QUESTION. Would the Green Bay Packers be 4-0 right now if MM had come out in the first game with a base package like we did when we had Green and Henderson in the past? The answer is not no. It's HELL no.
You can talk technique all day but even if the technique isn't just right when we put two backs in there and run left there are defensive bodies flying all over the place and guys coming down the line from behind the play. THERE'S NO WHERE TO GO. The question is why?
The answer is this as far as I see. Until MM puts his base package on the field and runs his entire playbook out of it and says "stop this" vs. using it very sparingly I don't see how we're going to get a lot of running yards.
The REAL problem is that we have not found a way to get yards on the ground out of our pass formations with a back in there when the defense is thinking pass. I don't know if the ZBS is the best way to go when your in a one back formation and passing most the time.
I think it works better with a FB and TE in there yet the defense has to be prepared for run OR pass. It has worked for Denver and Atlanta but they don't run out of the formations we line up in 90% of the time.
That's why I don't think this is a technique issue.
Pack93z
You retired too? .... Not me. I'm in my prime
War.. great post, we shall see how things progress and hopefully whatever is missing appears.
Another note from last nights game.. watch the tackles they are rocked back in there stance every passing play presnap. On the running plays, Tausch was in a 3 point and Cliffy was in a 3 point some and on his balls of the feet the others..
If we can see it, I guarantee the opposition can to.. they know pre-snap when we are going to run the ball or pass... thus allowing them to rush upfield or stay home and fill a gap. Seen it on the NFLN last night... just an observation.
Another note from last nights game.. watch the tackles they are rocked back in there stance every passing play presnap. On the running plays, Tausch was in a 3 point and Cliffy was in a 3 point some and on his balls of the feet the others..
If we can see it, I guarantee the opposition can to.. they know pre-snap when we are going to run the ball or pass... thus allowing them to rush upfield or stay home and fill a gap. Seen it on the NFLN last night... just an observation.
dhpackr
Cheesehead
really shouldn't matter if teams know we are gonna run. many times knew the packers were going to run in the past, and we still ran the ball.
Pack93z
You retired too? .... Not me. I'm in my prime
Correct, plus we had experience and consistency for a couple years in coaches.. but alas this isn't 2004.
Same lineman protect Favre without much issue this year.. they couldn't do that last year. Progress?
I think this running thread and all others have ran there course..
So in the end.. we must SUCK at it..
dhpackr
Cheesehead
dhpackr said:
Correct, plus we had experience and consistency for a couple years in coaches.. but alas this isn't 2004.
Same lineman protect Favre without much issue this year.. they couldn't do that last year. Progress?
I think this running thread and all others have ran there course..
So in the end.. we must SUCK at it..
i get it
peace out
pf.com
warhawk
Cheesehead
They knew we WOULD run but they didn't know WHEN we would run. Big difference.
We lined up Green behind Henderson with Bubba on the end and at the end of the game all three had caught passes and contributed a bunch all the way around. Green was great with a screen pass and Hondo was money out in the flat and Brett routinely checked off and found Bubba. No way teams just knew what we were going to run. That's why it worked.
dhpackr
Cheesehead
did you ever hear of a play called the Packer sweep?
what of the u-71 package?
warhawk
Cheesehead
Yeah, we ought to take the facemasks off the helmets like they did back then too. Maybe the linemen are just not seeing the guy across from them.
Geesh.
Geesh.
porky88
Cheesehead
I think they need to do what they got to do to win the game. Whether it's running, passing, or both. I'd like to see both but I'll take a win and 45 pass attempts over a loss and 150 yards rushing.
