2016-2017 Green Bay Packers Thread

[brewcrewdue80]

I'd imagine if you rushed 5 or 6 there's 1 receiver(likely RB) who is probably 20-35yards downfield depending how quick the incoming rush. Which more than likely is wide open but has to now run past 5 or 6 defenders awaiting near the goal line. You would have that lateral potential if you ran towards one OB side and one of the WRs who ran in to endzone ran towards other sideline, or of course a tailing Lineman hustling down field not that you expect much, but he'd extend the play with more laterals.

I personally would call 3man rush with a spy linebacker to blitz after 2 or 3 secs. because typically the QB always runs out the pocket. So rather than on the snap just wait to see where he heads and beat him there.

[CheezWizHed]

CheeseHeadTV article from Dec 2015:Overall the Packers have run 170 regular season plays where they needed one-yard to score or pick up a first down since the start of the 2013 season. They have converted the first down or touchdown on 106 of them, good for a success rate of 62.4 percent.

 

On those plays the Packers chose to pass the ball 37.6 percent of the time. Meaning they run the ball roughly two-thirds of the time when needing one-yard.

 

This makes sense because they are much more successful at running the ball than they are passing the ball in this scenario, with a 66 percent success rate they are 10 percent more successful over the last three seasons when running the ball than passing it to pick up that one-yard.

 

Run Plays

[pre]Player Attempts Successful Conversions Percentage

Kuhn 11 8 72.7%

Lacy 51 34 66.7%

Rodgers 5 4 80.0%

Starks 33 22 66.7%[/pre]

[brewcrewdue80]

CheeseHeadTV article from Dec 2015:Overall the Packers have run 170 regular season plays where they needed one-yard to score or pick up a first down since the start of the 2013 season. They have converted the first down or touchdown on 106 of them, good for a success rate of 62.4 percent.

 

On those plays the Packers chose to pass the ball 37.6 percent of the time. Meaning they run the ball roughly two-thirds of the time when needing one-yard.

 

This makes sense because they are much more successful at running the ball than they are passing the ball in this scenario, with a 66 percent success rate they are 10 percent more successful over the last three seasons when running the ball than passing it to pick up that one-yard.

 

Run Plays

[pre]Player Attempts Successful Conversions Percentage

Kuhn 11 8 72.7%

Lacy 51 34 66.7%

Rodgers 5 4 80.0%

Starks 33 22 66.7%[/pre]

 

wow surprised just 170 of these situations in 64 games. This has to be limited to only 3rd and 4th down situations, or maybe just 3rd downs?

 

Oh edit, I see this is from 2015. Makes more sense.

[tmwiese55]

Good find. I skimmed through it and obviously was surprised at Kuhn's success rate, in the one you quoted here and others they mentioned. I'd be curious if it was expanded to 2 yds, or on spread carries vs 22 men within 9 ft of the ball carries, or any 'and goal' carry to Kuhn inside the 5 yd line, but I didn't see any extension in the article so it's the best we have, just hard to believe Kuhn was only stuffed like 4 times in those years. There was some other related articles at the time too that kind of showed that Lacy was well below average in this situation, so at least my memory is good there (and then I can blame Kuhn for blocking), lol.

 

Just ran through the play by play in Seattle game. Looks like first FG both Lacy and Kuhn were stuffed on and 1 situations leading to the FG. The second 'and goal' was from the 6 or 7 yd line and they passed on 2nd and 3rd down. Then had 4th and goal from the 1, and decided to kick FG probably because they were stuffed last possession.

 

ETA: other links regarding the poor 3rd and shorts the last few years. http://www.acmepackingcompany.com/packers-free-agency-2016-news-reports/2016/2/2/10889180/packers-2016-free-agency-james-starks-john-kuhn

 

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2601165-green-bay-packers-held-back-by-3rd-down-woes

[CheezWizHed]

ESPN almost has the information we are looking for, but doesn't put it all together.

- On the stats, they list how many rushing First Downs a player had (Rip had 10 FD in 34 rushing attempts)

- On the splits, they have stats on 3rd or 4th down with 1-2 yards to go but they don't list FD accomplished in those situations (Rip was 6 rushes for 28 yards)

 

Its been a very long time since the Packers were a power rushing team. I was listening on the radio to the 4th down call and confused as to what 40 yard line we were at. If we were on the other side of the 50, it would make sense. But up 8 points and on your own 40 yard line, it was stupid.

[MrTPlush]

Yah the reason you don't rush more is the fact you open up more possibilities outside of the Hail Mary. Honestly outside of Rodgers how many QBs have multiple in their career? Hail Marys have horrible success rates. You want the other team to throw a Hail Mary.

[jerichoholicninja]

Yup I don't like going for it on 4th no matter what. That was a crappy offense that was already struggling. Why even give them the chance at a short field? Dumb.

 

 

Aaron Rodgers finds 9 seconds to throw on a normal play. I am sure he would appreciate if other teams rushed more players. I don't think Aaron Rodgers is 99% lucky on his Hail Marys. There is a reason he keeps finding ways to do it. Richard Rodgers one was in credible timing/accuracy/box out. The Cardinals playoff one was to a singular receiver and one incredible throw. Those aren't luck. Those are incredible plays by a player who can do everything.

 

When you have 6 players all jumping for the ball whoever catches it is total happenstance. Certainly it takes a lot of skill on Rodgers part to drop it into a 5x5ish box but he has nothing to do with if and who catches it.

[DuWayne Steurer]

When you have 6 players all jumping for the ball whoever catches it is total happenstance. Certainly it takes a lot of skill on Rodgers part to drop it into a 5x5ish box but he has nothing to do with if and who catches it.

 

 

Absolutely true. On this particular play, Cobb wasn't even supposed to be the catcher/jumpman, he was supposed to box out for Davonte Adams. I honestly don't know why they specify cartain roles for the guys down there though, as the ball is going to come down where it comes down, and everyone has to just be ready to do whatever is necessary, be it tip the ball, just catch it, box out, or whatever.

[CheezWizHed]

Yup I don't like going for it on 4th no matter what. That was a crappy offense that was already struggling. Why even give them the chance at a short field? Dumb.

 

 

Aaron Rodgers finds 9 seconds to throw on a normal play. I am sure he would appreciate if other teams rushed more players. I don't think Aaron Rodgers is 99% lucky on his Hail Marys. There is a reason he keeps finding ways to do it. Richard Rodgers one was in credible timing/accuracy/box out. The Cardinals playoff one was to a singular receiver and one incredible throw. Those aren't luck. Those are incredible plays by a player who can do everything.

 

When you have 6 players all jumping for the ball whoever catches it is total happenstance. Certainly it takes a lot of skill on Rodgers part to drop it into a 5x5ish box but he has nothing to do with if and who catches it.

 

[sarcasm]You're saying that Rodger's has no divine connection to keep making Hail Marys (Maries?) successful? Who let this goon in here? Throw him out![/sarcasm]

 

I think he is saying that Rodger's ability to throw the ball high and drop it down at the right spot in the endzone makes it more likely to catch than mere [sarcasm]human[/sarcasm] QBs.

[FVBrewerFan]

I think he is saying that Rodger's ability to throw the ball high and drop it down at the right spot in the endzone makes it more likely to catch than mere human QBs.

 

One time is close to pure luck, three times tells you it's more than just luck. The trajectory makes a difference, I'm sure. But I also think they now actually believe they can score, it's not just chucking it up and hoping for the best. Obviously, still plenty of luck involved but far from pure luck.

[homer]

AZ blitzed (or at least brought pressure) on the playoff hail mary. It was only because Rodgers is so mobile that the play had any chance at all.

[brewcrewdue80]

AZ blitzed (or at least brought pressure) on the playoff hail mary. It was only because Rodgers is so mobile that the play had any chance at all.

 

Much of the long developing pass plays this is true. The Line isn't as good as outsiders believe. They see a 5-7sec pass play completion by Rodgers and think that happens more often than not. I will give credit to the line in that they know and do a great job to pass-block longer than 3 or 4secs, which you see many other teams' OL kinda quit.

 

The way Rodgers eludes DEs the game must just move so slow for him in his mind. So often he perfectly escapes the pocket going around the end about to put pressure on him. Especially the blitzers that fast oncoming rush he side steps and eludes out away from. The Giants early on kept a good triangle as they pushed on their rush. Rather than 1 side being further up field creating an opening, they just closed in equally and Rodgers was hit and sacked what was it 4sacks/7hits? before their 1st TD? After that initial great defense, that triangle got wider and worse timing on the pressure. Rodgers did what he does and dominated after that.

 

Say we beat Dallas. Which team would you hope to face?

[pitchleague]

I'd like another shot at Atlanta, personally. But at the same time, I'd also like to beat Seattle at their place like we should have a couple of years ago.

 

I'm still bitter.

[MrTPlush]

Our OL is as great as people think it is. I am sure Rodgers makes them statistically look better, but that OL can't be much better pass blocking. Rodgers is really in tune with that line and they know how to block for him. Rodgers owes a lot of credit to what that line does for him.

 

This game comes down to the Packers holding Elliot in check. Because if they do that it is Prescott vs. Rodgers and if Rodgers plays like he has he won't be outdueled. Rodgers loves domes and it is a big reason he dominated to his last Super Bowl win. Cowboys are a dang good team though.

[tmwiese55]

I think I'd clearly prefer to play Seattle. We just beat them down a few weeks ago. But most importantly, with the state of our CB situation I think Atlanta's passing offense is the worst matchup we could possibly have.

[MrTPlush]

I think I'd clearly prefer to play Seattle. We just beat them down a few weeks ago. But most importantly, with the state of our CB situation I think Atlanta's passing offense is the worst matchup we could possible have.

 

Yah if we win I think everyone is hoping it is the Seahawks on the other side. The Seahawks are not a very good team and we murdered them last time. Things probably wouldn't be that bad again, but I have a hard time seeing the Packers losing even if it is in Seattle.

 

Seattle isn't good at all though and I don't expect them to beat the Falcons.

[patrickgpe]

sorry to hijack this thread, but interesting article on the future of the GM position in the paper

 

http://www.jsonline.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/mcginn/2017/01/12/mcginn-dorsey-ideal-option-next-packers-gm/96489822/?from=global&sessionKey=&autologin=

 

i thought John Dorsey was no longer contract after this season, apparently its not until after the 2018 draft, just like Thompson. wouldn't is be very risky to let the internal candidates get GM positions (Ball, Gutekunst, Wolf) on the hope that Dorsey doesn't extend his contract in KC and wants to go back to GM, Very risky.

[patrickgpe]

I think I'd clearly prefer to play Seattle. We just beat them down a few weeks ago. But most importantly, with the state of our CB situation I think Atlanta's passing offense is the worst matchup we could possibly have.

 

I think this is a hard one for a few reasons

 

1) better home field advantage in Seattle

2) Rodgers always seems to play better in domes

 

that being said the packers secondary is banged up and i would rather put the GB defense up against Seattle than Atlanta, so its a close call.

[pacopete4]

Jordy ruled out. It's Janis time!

[patrickgpe]

Jordy ruled out. It's Janis time!

Hopefully Cobb can have another game like last week with no Jordy

[Point Beer Is Best]

Jordy ruled out. It's Janis time!

 

I think it will likely be more Geronimo Allison, since Janis has proven to only be able to run one route.

[CheezWizHed]

Jordy ruled out. It's Janis time!

 

I think it will likely be more Geronimo Allison, since Janis has proven to only be able to run one route.

 

True, but when he hits on those routes, they are home runs! See AZ last playoffs. Maybe Janis stole Manning's playoff magic!

[CheezWizHed]

sorry to hijack this thread, but interesting article on the future of the GM position in the paper

 

I'm going to hijack the hijack...

 

Since we only have one thread available for GBP here at BF.net, inserting different topics is really the only way to manage it. Thus, its not really a hijack unless you don't talk about GBP stuff.

 

Since LL.net has died off, I've put in a request to make a section for Other Wisconsin Sports. Thus, we can have different threads for Packer, Bucks and Badger topics without having to dump it all into one thread per team.

 

The request is going up to the BF.net owner for consideration as it may change costs due to extra traffic. Just thought I'd let you know that its being considered.

[Oldcity]

sorry to hijack this thread, but interesting article on the future of the GM position in the paper

 

http://www.jsonline.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/mcginn/2017/01/12/mcginn-dorsey-ideal-option-next-packers-gm/96489822/?from=global&sessionKey=&autologin=

 

i thought John Dorsey was no longer contract after this season, apparently its not until after the 2018 draft, just like Thompson. wouldn't is be very risky to let the internal candidates get GM positions (Ball, Gutekunst, Wolf) on the hope that Dorsey doesn't extend his contract in KC and wants to go back to GM, Very risky.

 

So let TT retire at age 65 to hire a John Dorsey, who will be 58 at that time, and then also surely lose the younger guys. Great call.

 

McGinn has really lost his touch. Combine this with his numerous trolling articles the last few years, and I remember why I don't read him anymore.

[LouisEly]

sorry to hijack this thread, but interesting article on the future of the GM position in the paper

 

I'm going to hijack the hijack...

 

Since we only have one thread available for GBP here at BF.net, inserting different topics is really the only way to manage it. Thus, its not really a hijack unless you don't talk about GBP stuff.

 

Since LL.net has died off, I've put in a request to make a section for Other Wisconsin Sports. Thus, we can have different threads for Packer, Bucks and Badger topics without having to dump it all into one thread per team.

 

The request is going up to the BF.net owner for consideration as it may change costs due to extra traffic. Just thought I'd let you know that its being considered.

We need to somehow save the Draft forum at LL.net...