Will lack of a running game be Packers undoing?

quote:

Originally posted by CJS:
Since this is a topic we've discussed ad nauseum this year...

The answer to your riddle lies within the question

Can't say one way or another until we see how much Starks is utilized. That is my honest take.

Jackson and even Kuhn aren't going to make a impact against a team with a stout dline like Chicago and they may have the best D front of the NFC opponents. It truly has to be a 3/4 headed attack utilized in equal proportions. Jackson, Kuhn, Starks and even Nance. If it can take some focus off the passing game the Packers have enough gas on the offense to go the distance.

It just needs enough to keep the defenses shifting gears a bit. Plus, roll out the pocket with Rodgers as well.

They have played without a running game all season. Just one game at a time. The general undoing of all the losses were bad penalties, special teams gaffes etc. This team can beat anyone, they just need to get 3 yards on running plays and execute on the passing plays i.e. don't drop the ball.

Turnovers are usually the key.

We can overcome a weak running game if we are neutral or +1 or more in the turnover battle.

quote:

Originally posted by Henry:
Can't say one way or another until we see how much Starks is utilized. That is my honest take.

Jackson and even Kuhn aren't going to make a impact against a team with a stout dline like Chicago and they may have the best D front of the NFC opponents. It truly has to be a 3/4 headed attack utilized in equal proportions. Jackson, Kuhn, Starks and even Nance. If it can take some focus off the passing game the Packers have enough gas on the offense to go the distance.

It just needs enough to keep the defenses shifting gears a bit. Plus, roll out the pocket with Rodgers as well.

Post of the year on this topic. I almost included an option stating that it depended on MM's use of Starks, but I wanted to keep the poll simple. We definitely have the most trouble with teams that can stop our running game while staying in a pass D.

Well said Henry.

Jackson and Kuhn were pretty effective against New England, let's remember that.

The defense has held up it's end all year. I also agree with GBfanforlife, the losses also can be attributed to bad ST gaffes and dumb penalties.

I am more concerned about Buluga hitting the wall and the oline having a off game than I am of the backfield personnel.

The thrust of the piece really seems to be more about AR than it is the lack of a running game. Judge apparently doesn't believe that Rodgers is capable of getting it done and I disagree wholeheartedly.

this thread has quickly gone gay

Only took the 9th post to get it there.

quote:

The thrust of the piece

Yep, gay.

New Orleans rushed for 68 yards in the NFCC and won. Because they won the turnover battle, and they have a dominant passing game.

New Orleans rushed for 51 yards in the Super Bowl and win. Because they won the turnover battle, and they have a dominant passing game.

Indianapolis rushed for 42 yards in the divisional round and won. Because they won the turnover battle, and they have a dominant passing game.

I can go on to Pittsburgh in 2008 and myriad other examples where teams won in the playoffs with anemic rushing stats.

If you have an average passing game, I'd argue a lack of a running game hurts. Moreso in the playoffs. If you have a dominant passing game, the lack of running game doesn't impact you as much.

The Packers will win or lose in the playoffs based on 2 things: Rodgers and the passing game being in synch and turnovers.

Winning the turnover battle is 100x more critical than winning the rushing battle.

On a serious note, what's the deal with predicting the demise of the team? Christ, one team leaves the season on a high note. Everybody else is disappointed when the suddenness of their season coming to a screeching halt. If GB loses a game in the playoffs, it will be because something went wrong.... running game, turnovers, penalties, dropped balls, whatever.... if none of those things occur, GB wins the Super Bowl. Sit back, get excited and enjoy the ride MF's!

At this point, I have to say it's not just the backfield personnel. The blocking has to be there. But we've seen what Starks can do breaking tackles and getting the extra yard.

I disagree that we haven't lost games this year because of the lack of a running game. I'd say Atlanta & Detroit were on the running game and I'd also say that the lack of offensive production verses the Bears was also on the running game. It's just that our passing game is so good, we're usually able to overcome it. When we can't pass... well, that's when the lack of a run game is most glaring.

As for the other factors being the primary reason we fail, I don't think penalties will be it. Bulaga had a bad game with it, but this team has really focused on this area and "cleaned it up". We're pretty good taking care of the ball too, although our WR's seem to be the weakest link here.

It will be interesting to see what happens. Personally I'm voting for option 3.

Agree about the turnovers being critical. However, I really think that how our OL performs will be what determines how far we go. If the play like they did against the Bears, I doubt if we'll go far.

By the way, after the Lions game, I posted that the Pack was in deep doodoo and was unlikely to make the playoffs. I was wrong about that.

quote:

Originally posted by Pakrz:
On a serious note, what's the deal with predicting the demise of the team?

I posted it due to the article, but I think it's an important conversation. I agree, it's a good time to enjoy the ride.

quote:

Originally posted by Pakrz:
On a serious note, what's the deal with predicting the demise of the team? Christ, one team leaves the season on a high note. Everybody else is disappointed when the suddenness of their season coming to a screeching halt. If GB loses a game in the playoffs, it will be because something went wrong.... running game, turnovers, penalties, dropped balls, whatever.... if none of those things occur, GB wins the Super Bowl. Sit back, get excited and enjoy the ride MF's!

sometimes I think you are smart.

for about 13 seconds/ week

The lack of a running game only becomes an issue when the defense decides it can stop the running plays without the help of safeties or even some of the line-backers. If a team can stop the run with minimal effect on the secondary and not committing people to stop the run...then the Pack is in trouble.

So far that has not happened. Play action has still been effective, even without success on runs. The linebackers are still stepping up, the safeties are still instictively moving forward....so the Pack can still pass off of run action with success.

Sure it would be nice to gain more than one yard on a first down carry, but atleast if you run enough times on first down you may get that big play off of play action later on.

I didn't pick one.

I think the running game could undo the Packers if they play at Chicago and the weather is brutal.

From reading some threads, I see that the Eagle's defense has been weak as of late. Kind'a don't see the lack of a better running game being some kind of deciding factor there. Should Pack win, I see the Georgia Dome as well-suited for a strong passing game, so don't see it there.

At Chicago if there are ugly field conditions? Yeah, I could see that. But, the probability of having that occurrence is small to me.

13? Mooooving on uuup!

quote:

Turnovers are usually the key.

Zuf said e nuff.

End of story.

I can't look past any other opponent then the Eagles since that's who were facing. Having said that I don't believe it will be GB's running game that will make the difference in this game.

The key IMO is on one position for the Packers.

Tackle.

Chad Clifton had his worst game against Trent Cole and the Eagles back in week 1. Tauscher also struggled mightily.

If the Packers offense is going to roll, Clifton and Bugula must have solid games. Far better then Clifton had in week 1 and far better then Bugula's had in the last 2 weeks (he struggled against the Giants as well).

I don't doubt MM will try to slow down that pass rush so look for screens to B-Jax and Starks and quick slants and curls. But Rodgers is going to have to get some time to pass or they're need to roll him out to throw it if our Tackles can't stop the Eagles D line.

As others have posted, you can go plenty far without a dominant running game.

But on offense it's the tackle position that has me most concerned.

J-A-M-E-S ---- S-T-A-R-K-S

Wait & see...

Enjoying the journey.

So who you got wot can beat the Patriots? Without either a running game or a running back?

Besides the running game, these are additional concerns of mine: clock management/utilizing challenges, pass protection for ARod, DeSean Jackson returning punts, and relying on Crosby to hit a long FG late in the game to win or tie it up.

This game is winnable for Green Bay but it's crucial for the offense hold up their end and take pressure off the defense.

Can you find out Mike McCarthy's rate for challenges won and lost? He was 6th best in the NFL in 2008 and has done pretty well this year.

He lost one yesterday that even Mike Pereira could not believe they lost.

From Seifert's NFC North blog on ESPN 1/1:

2010 NFC NORTH CHALLENGE TRACKER
Coach Challenges Plays overturned Percentage
Lovie Smith 6 1 16.7
Jim Schwartz 4 2 50.0
Mike McCarthy 5 3 60.0
Brad Childress 6 2 33.3
Leslie Frazier 3 1 33.3
Source: NFL Game Statistics and Information System

3 out of 5. #1 in the north again this year. Yet, people complain about him.

Reply to TD:

I'm not talking about his success rate. I thought there were three instances in the Falcons game where a challenge should have been made but wasn't: when Nance appeared to get a first down after a second effort on a run, when Arod slid for a first down but received a bad spot, and the non-catch by Gonzalez.

I also remember him challenging Jones' fumble in the first Bears game which wasted a timeout.

I'm drawing a blank but I thought there was one other in the 2nd Lions game or the Patriots game.

It's not squarely on MM because the head coach relies on the assistants in the booth. I think there have been some missed opportunities this season that could have made a difference in a game or two.

Raji, Mathews, Woodson, Tramon, Collins, Hawk, and their associates are difference makers.

quote:

when Nance appeared to get a first down after a second effort on a run, when Arod slid for a first down but received a bad spot, and the non-catch by Gonzalez.

1)Nance No replay shown

2)He slid before the 1st would've lost

3) No replay of the Gonzalez catch that showed no catch before they ran another play

Not sure this team can be judged like others on the run game. We've seen games recently where any type of positive yardage- even just 2-3 yards on 1st downs- opens the playbook dramatically for MM and Rodgers. THIS to me, given injuries and lack of tallant in backfield, lack of execution on o-line, is the key to the success of the offense.

It certainly isn't optimal, but I know that I was scratching my head in the 2nd qtr yesterday when McCarthy seemed to resort to the spread/4-5 wide almost exclusively. It's the THREAT of a running game that opens the play action. It's freezing guys like Antrel Rolle for that split second, and that's where the rhythm comes from. When Rodgers and company get in that rhythm, that's when they're the most dangerous. Last week their best drive was 30 plus yds to Driver, 30 plus yds to Jennings and 1st and goal short yardage. This week their best drive was over the middle to Driver, and a great downfield toss to Jennings- once again 1st and goal from the 1. All set up off of play action.

Making any positive running yds on 1st or second down is the most important thing for this offense, at this point.

As far as MM goes, I think someone posted a couple weeks ago that he's a very good game planner, but his in-game decisions (clock mgt, goal line play calling, etc) sometimes leave something to be desired.

MY hope is that the Packers are ahead enough so that the game won't come down to something as small as a poor challenge - which as shown above isn't really one of MM's weaknesses this year.

quote:

Originally posted by artis:
It's the THREAT of a running game that opens the play action. .... This week their best drive was over the middle to Driver, and a great downfield toss to Jennings- once again 1st and goal from the 1. All set up off of play action.

Making any positive running yds on 1st or second down is the most important thing for this offense, at this point.

Yesterday I was wondering why we don't see Kuhn or Starks in the I more often and then run play-action. I'd also like to see BJax on the sideline until 3rd down.

Coppers need to quit drooling like CJS is a punk in a commuter lot.

BJ and Kuhn were stonewalled against a stiff Bears line.

Starks had a bunch of giddy up in that game and he had all of 4/5 rushes?

I am all about team unity and making a guy earn it but the simple fact is Starks was churning out yards that BJ was geting stuffed on.

It matters because this team can go all the way with all the injuries.

quote:

I'm drawing a blank but I thought there was one other in the 2nd Lions game or the Patriots game.

Greg Jennings' TD catch in the Lions game is probably what you are thinking of.

quote:

Originally posted by Henry:
Coppers need to quit drooling like CJS is a punk in a commuter lot.

I need a Henry interpreter. Oshbaul, can you help me out?

I think this team has proven they can win consistently without a solid running game, but long term I don't know that it's the best strategy. Rodgers took a lot of shots this year, and we certainly want him to be around for 10+ years. Having an established running game in place can help Rodgers out quite a bit.

We don't know enough yet about Starks, but Kuhn is OK in certain situations. Brandon Jackson is garbage as a runner, but we've known that for 3 years now. He's a good 3rd down back but that's about it.

If the Packers lose it's because they waste to many plays trying to run. The team should not listen to all their critics of the run game and keep pounding Kuhn and Jackson into the line. Instead answer that question by saying, "We are not a bad running team. We are the worst. We can't run so we pass every down". Don't deny the obvious, embrace it. Use the West Coast short passing game as our running game. When the D comes up go over the top with our talented receivers/QB. Then when Philly thinks we are passing every stinkin down then you run.