From Lambeau to Lombardi, Holmgren, McCarthy and LaFleur and from Starr to Favre, Rodgers and now Jordan Love we’re talking Super Bowl Champion Green Bay Packers football. This Packers Forum is the place to talk NFL football and everything Packers. So, pull up a keyboard, make yourself at home and let’s talk some Packers football.
There are 3 primary branches of the original WCO; the Hackett variant, the Holmgren variant, and the Shanahan variant. Interestingly MLF closes the loop, now all 3 have been in GB.
Obviously Holmgren brought high variant with him. Holmgren's variant tends to be what people think of when they think WCO (Dennis Green also ran this variant) with spread formations and screen passes as runs.
McCarthy ran the Hackett variant, which used deeper route concepts and much less screens. It was much closer to the Air Coryell that the WCO is descended from. But McCarthy did try to emulate Shanahan's variant in the running game (albeit with limited success).
People tend to forget that the Shanahan offense was also a WCO variant, he was the OC that replaced Holmgren when he left for GB. Unlike Holmgren who used the pass as a run, Shanahan just ran it.
Mac's 2011 is pretty much the most successful the Hackett variant has ever been. The Holmgren variant found a ton of success, between the late 80's 49ers, the mid 90's Packers, the 00's Eagles and now the Chiefs, though Andy has evolved quite a bit from the late 80's 49ers root.
The Shanahan variant was strongest in the early 90's in SF and the late 90's in Den and found success again in the 2018 Rams. Though there has been an absolute explosion in the tree as of late with MLF, Kyle, Sean McVay, and Antony Lynn all young head coaches. The renaissance of running in the NFL is being led by this group.
While the 2011 Packers will always be the/a model for the Hackett/McCarthy variant, for the Shanahan variant the peaks are the 1994 49ers, the 1998 Broncos, and 2018 Rams.
excellent explanations Waldo, I always gave the credit for the west coast tree to Walsh, but now that you mention Don Coryell it does make sense, and what Walsh/Hackett did was a carry over of that.
obviously if it works, a little tinkering will make it better, course evolution encourages adjustments, once defenses devise ways to stop the currant trend, OC's need to scheme up stuff there not prepared for, thanks for the work, there a lot here to digest.
this adds some clarity, when you total up the points scored by the top 3 receivers of each team the 2019 Packers are the lowest, (255) only 20 points to the 016 Falcons (275) 90 points to 98 Denver (345) 73 lower then 018 Rams (328) and 56 to the 94 49ers (311), now some of this probably reflects the decision to run more, with us, it reflects the drop in production from Adams to our 2nd and 3rd receiver.
Last edited by Yoop on 29 Apr 2020 09:42, edited 1 time in total.
Always room to improve, and i am sure he can improve...but in year one..12 was just not accomplishing what Lafleur wants to accomplish with the O it seems.
Also, interesting to see that it's not just Shanahan style offences that used play action. The Chiefs I think were actually the top team to use it last year.
If it's good enough for those teams maybe we should be doing more of it. And to make it work adding a H-Back and a power back like Dillon makes sense.
MLF didn't run it as much as the elite variants of his offense. I'm guessing he's targeting 475 or so carries, an increase of 4 per game from where they were. He also passed more than elite variants of his offense. I'm guessing he wants it closer to 525 passes, a decrease of about 3 per game. Its hard to use the "well elite variants were winning so likely were running more to eat clock" since GB was a 13-3 team, they weren't exactly playing catch up much.
Pass distribution tends to be to what is available. The 90's 49ers and Rams passed to the RB more than GB did, I'm guessing this is one place where we are going to see some passing expansion; MLF likely had no idea his RB1 was as good a receiver as he showed as the season went on. Getting Jones up to a Ricky Watters level of targets (high 80's), if not even higher, seems like not only a good scheme fit but also the best use of available talent.
The FB/H-Back role is also very prime for passing expansion. The 2019 Packers had an irrelevant number of targets to this role (<20 if you combine Vitale with some of Tonyan's targets). The 98 Broncos gave a ton of these snaps to TE1 (Sharpe), 50+ targets is not unusual for this scheme. Kittle in SF also moves to this role at times, so they are higher there as well than the distribution indicates. I'm guessing MLF would like Degura to be a 30-50 target guy (for reference, Kuhn was an <20 target guy, Henderson was a 35-50 target guy in his prime (incidentally a 3rd rd pick in 1995))
WR2 is low in GB, however this is a bit of an artifact of the musical chairs there. The 2018 Rams also had high targets to WR3 and esp WR4, but for the the Rams this was an artifact of low having very little at TE (2016 Falcons too). I'm guessing MLF wants it more like the 1994 49ers, with TE1 being over 70 targets, but the talent needs to match.
Low end WR's, #4-#5 and even #3 to a degree were overused in GB in 2019, at the expense of RB, TE, and FB/H-Back. This likely had a lot to do with the talent; he didn't know what he had at RB1, TE1 produced poorly, and the FB/H-back role just was lacking in useable talent (in the passing game). And this is on top of the passing game in general being overused in GB.
Its pretty clear this draft cut to the heart of what MLF wants to do.
Might have overdrafted the H-back a bit, but he appears to have been a must-have, and they weren't willing to risk waiting to the 5th pick (or relying on a trade up from there); its also likely they were trying to trade down but couldn't find a dance partner. He's likely looking for William Henderson level useage from the position; the targets of a typical WR3/4.
Having better RB's always makes it easier to run the ball; an upgrade over Williams (both) would also free up RB1 to be more active in the passing game.
Sternberger is such a huge lynchpin to the offense this season. Ideally he would be at WR2 level production.
WR2 is low in GB, however this is a bit of an artifact of the musical chairs there. The 2018 Rams also had high targets to WR3 and esp WR4, but for the the Rams this was an artifact of low having very little at TE (2016 Falcons too). I'm guessing MLF wants it more like the 1994 49ers, with TE1 being over 70 targets, but the talent needs to match.
kinda what I've been harping on, mainly as you say we just havn't had a consisten player step up to keep the #2 spot, also agree we have not dedicated enough snaps to the run, some of us complained about that through out the McCarthy era, specially so sense we did not use the pass as we use to under the Holmgren WCO, we simply didn't do either, and imo it's why we became so predictable, and it became easier to defend our deep passing schemes, once the WR decline started it became near impossible for Rodgers to throw on schedule, he constantly had to extend plays, both Rodgers and McCarthy got into a rut.
I like a mix, always thought our great passing offense of 011, early decade, would become more multi layored, and now it's obvious it will be, I also think only so much can be changed in one off season, so this is chapter two of MLF coming up, and these additions, while not exactly what I would do, should still add a lot of punch to what Matt plans to do, lots of PA and running will help our receivers, so obviously Rodgers wont be bored and will still get to fling the ball around, just possibly minus some duress of having to extend plays and take a beating.
I fully recognize that this is a HOPE and not an expectation.
But EQSB has been "My Guy" since before the draft at WR and my goodness, it would fill my heart (and dynasty league chances) with joy if he came through with a big season of physically imposing size, blocking, and a bunch of yards and catches to make this whole thing a bit moot.
Read this about the Bears but much of it of interest considering LaFleur talked a lot about being in 12 personnel over the weekend.
The Zag.
As the rest of the National Football League tries to get faster, the Chicago Bears added a 260-pound tight end with their first pick in the 2020 NFL Draft. Then they raved about his potential as a blocker.
The Bears are doing something very different in 2020.
According to Sharp Football, the Bears ran ’12’ personnel – one RB, two TEs and WRs – on just 13 percent of their snaps in 2019 and 17 percent in 2018. The drafting of Cole Kmet with the 43rd pick was a clear indication that the Bears are going to use the second tight end more. Way more.
After making the pick, GM Ryan Pace raved about Kmet’s all-around ability. He spoke about his size, hands and ability to “post up” and get position. But where Pace really got excited was talking about run blocking. “He’s got the frame and the size, the temperament and the demeanor where we think he’s going to get a lot better as a blocker,” Pace said.
In many ways, the drafting of Kmet was a commitment to a different style of offense, one that will surely feature running back David Montgomery more.
Playing Big.
The Bears didn’t play big in 2019 because they couldn’t succeed that way.
They didn’t have a single, good tight end.
The team passer rating in ’12’ personnel was below 70 and they averaged fewer than four yards per carry. The hope is that Kmet’s ability as a blocker and a receiver makes ’12’ personnel package dangerous.
We have seen this work in the same scheme. Doug Pederson’s Philadelphia Eagles used ’12’ on 54 percent of their snaps in 2019. Carson Wentz had a passer rating of 99.2 and they averaged 4.2 yards per carry. Zach Ertz. Dallas Goedert.
Attack the Weakness.
NFL defenses are adjusting to the speed of the Kansas City Chiefs and the continuously more spread offenses by getting smaller and quicker. The Bears appear to be shifting their scheme in order to attack this new weaknesses.
Specifically, if you look in the NFC North, the Packers allowed a passer rating of 114.3 and 4.5 yards per carry against ’12’ according to Sharp Football. The Vikings allowed a passer rating of 102.8 and the Lions 101.9. In three wide, one tight end sets, the Packers allowed a passer rating of 77.9, the Vikings, 89.7 and the Lions 96.5.
Throughout the league, 20 teams allowed a higher passer rating against ’12’ than they did against ’11’. League wide, teams had a passer rating of 97.4 playing in ’12’, compared to 89.3 in ’11’.
In addition to Kmet and Graham, the Bears have Demetrius Harris as another option. Harris has a rare combination of size (6’7”) and speed (4.53 40), but his best trait is actually his blocking. It isn’t hard to see scenarios in which the Bears use Kmet and Harris (or all three) in short-yardage situations. “We think (Kmet) pairs really well with Jimmy and pairs really well with Demetrius. They all do different things,” Pace said.
Kmet just turned 21 last month and is only scratching the surface of what he can become. The expectations shouldn’t be too high because rookie tight ends usually struggle. But the Bears didn’t draft him to sit on the bench.
course evolution encourages adjustments, once defenses devise ways to stop the currant trend, OC's need to scheme up stuff there not prepared for, thanks for the work, there a lot here to digest.
