Green Bay Packers News 2023

[Captain_Ben]

What is a pure run play?

[Yoop]

Jones and Dillon are pretty good, but the line wasn't too shabby either. Dillon is 39 out of 42 and Jones is 41 out of 42.

I was looking for blocking stats the other day, specially first half of season when Bahk and Jenkins where still getting over injury's, to no avail.

the thing these stats don't show is how much RB ypc stats increase when RB's have a lot of carries for plus 5 yrds as both Dillon and Jones do.

a good measure of blocking efficiency is how well the RB's do on pure run plays, and our record in the red zone last season says we didn't do good at that, it's one thing to have the advantage of PA as a blocker, that deception gives them the ability to get some drive on the DL and create a run gap, minus that deception and the blocker doesn't have that.

Yes, these stats don't show YPC because these stats are showing the percent of runs for 1 or fewer yards...

While it takes a good running back, with both Jones and Dillon at the tail end of the ranking, it does point to OL having a hand in it as well.

Play Action is not a run play... Let's not continue down that road.

again you refuse to accept how YPC stats can be misleading, and the reason Dillon and also Jones YPC averages are boosted because we do so much play action, which makes run blocking easier.

my comment had absolutely nothing to do with play action terminology, so your the guy taking it down that road.

we see just how poor the run blocking is at times, 2 years ago Dillon and Jones where near tops in the league with yards after contact ( I didn't bother to check for last year, but it seemed worse) and that contact seemed to often be south of the LOS, it was Quadzilla running through tackles, and Jones around them often for plus 6 and 7 yrds that kept there averages up.

[Yoop]

What is a pure run play?

ask Pcfkfn 23, he knows everything

actually that is becoming harder to determine

down and distance, teams often run on first down, we don't, but most teams do lol.

so much play action passing from what pre snap looks like a run, the tell I think is the sway of the OL as soon as the ball is snapped, if they drive off the snap then it is probably a run, if they set up, its probably a pass.

[Pckfn23]

I was looking for blocking stats the other day, specially first half of season when Bahk and Jenkins where still getting over injury's, to no avail.

the thing these stats don't show is how much RB ypc stats increase when RB's have a lot of carries for plus 5 yrds as both Dillon and Jones do.

a good measure of blocking efficiency is how well the RB's do on pure run plays, and our record in the red zone last season says we didn't do good at that, it's one thing to have the advantage of PA as a blocker, that deception gives them the ability to get some drive on the DL and create a run gap, minus that deception and the blocker doesn't have that.

Yes, these stats don't show YPC because these stats are showing the percent of runs for 1 or fewer yards...

While it takes a good running back, with both Jones and Dillon at the tail end of the ranking, it does point to OL having a hand in it as well.

Play Action is not a run play... Let's not continue down that road.

again you refuse to accept how YPC stats can be misleading, and the reason Dillon and also Jones YPC averages are boosted easier.

I wasn't posting or speeching to YPC... My OP tweet post had nothing to do with YPC. My original post was the percentage of runs that went for 1 or less yards, NOT YPC.

because we do so much play action, which makes run blocking

my comment had absolutely nothing to do with play action terminology, so your the guy taking it down that road.

You are using Play Action wrong yet again. Play Action is never a run so it has no bearing in what I posted or this discussion. My OP dealt strictly with RB runs. As I said, let's not go down the PA road.

AJ an AD were both on the very low end of the RBs who had the lowest percentage of 1 or less yard runs. Fior that to be the case the OL would have had to do something good things.

[bud fox]

Being play action heavy would actually help with this stat.

Especially if it's a good qb/passing game.

[BF004]

the thing these stats don't show is how much RB ypc stats increase when RB's have a lot of carries for plus 5 yrds

YPC goes up when they get longer runs??

[BF004]

Fun read

https://packerswire.usatoday.com/lists/ ... cv2rhadv43



Freaks at WR and CB.

Surprisingly thin at edge.

IDL disappointing.

[Pckfn23]

Fun read

https://packerswire.usatoday.com/lists/ ... cv2rhadv43



Freaks at WR and CB.

Surprisingly thin at edge.

IDL disappointing.

I saw that. Pretty fun. Couple thoughts:
WR needs to include James Jones as a Just Missed
TE is so thin it's transparent
OL is stacked!
I thought iDL was ok, just no world beaters, but all solid.
My memory of Bryce Paul is greater than reality.

[RingoCStarrQB]

What is a pure run play?

31 Wedge, on 2

[Crazylegs Starks]

Fun read

https://packerswire.usatoday.com/lists/ ... cv2rhadv43



Freaks at WR and CB.

Surprisingly thin at edge.

IDL disappointing.

I saw that. Pretty fun. Couple thoughts:
WR needs to include James Jones as a Just Missed
TE is so thin it's transparent
OL is stacked!
I thought iDL was ok, just no world beaters, but all solid.
My memory of Bryce Paul is greater than reality.

I agree on James Jones. Walker really only had one year where he was better than Jones, and one more where he was equal or slightly better. Yeah, I know he got injured but longevity counts for a lot.

At tight end, Donald Lee might be the next best?

I'd put Cullen Jenkins over Mike Daniels, but that's nitpicky.

It's kind of disappointing that Morgan Burnett was the fourth best safety.

[Yoop]

the thing these stats don't show is how much RB ypc stats increase when RB's have a lot of carries for plus 5 yrds

YPC goes up when they get longer runs??

oh so Dick Tracy of you.

YPC just like all these run stats can be deceiving when ya add in how there achieved

[Yoop]

Being play action heavy would actually help with this stat.

Especially if it's a good qb/passing game.

if play action where not so successful at freezing a defenses front 7, teams wouldn't use it as much as they do, our best outing last year we used it 48% of our pass plays, most teams in the league use it 30% or more of there pass plays, it keeps a defense guessing, and increases the success ratio of both the run and the pass.

there are reasons why our RB's are not stopped for no gain in 23's stats, and it sure as hell isn't because we have a great run blocking OL, or we wouldn't be last in red zone success.

https://dairylandexpress.com/2022/11/14 ... ay-action/

It’s been a rough season, to say the least, for the Packers and their passing game, specifically on deep shots, but Aaron Rodgers and the Green Bay offense looked like its old self on Sunday against Dallas when utilizing play-action.

As Matt LaFleur said following the game, leaning on the Packers’ rushing attack was going to give them the best chance of victory against a fierce Dallas pass rush. As good as the Cowboys have been at pressuring the quarterback this season, that aggressiveness hinders their run defense by creating running lanes and weak edges, which the Packers were able to exploit.

Aaron Jones and AJ Dillon would average 5.2 yards per carry on 27 attempts. This success on the ground, coupled with the Dallas defense crowding the line of scrimmage and playing a lot of one-high, helped set up the Packers’ play-action success.

According to PFF ($$), nearly 48% of Rodgers’ dropbacks came off play-action, and that was the highest rate in Week 10 out of all quarterbacks. On only 20 pass attempts, 11 were via play-action, with Rodgers completing nine of them at 13.5 yards per catch — the third-highest rate in Week 10 — with two touchdowns.

On both of those touchdown passes, play-action was a key element for the Packers’ offense. On the 58-yard pass to Christian Watson, the single-high safety bit on the run fake, leaving Watson one-on-one with the cornerback. On the other touchdown pass — Watson’s third — both linebackers jumped at the fake, leaving more room over the middle for Watson.

A large issue for Green Bay this season offensively has been their inability to connect on the deep ball. This has led to opposing defenses shrinking the field and challenging the Packers’ receivers at the line of scrimmage, which only compounds the issue and makes moving the ball through the air more difficult. However, the run game, then followed by play-action, was the catalyst behind several of the Packers’ big plays through the air.

The Packers have struggled mightily this season to marry the run and passing games, but both came together beautifully against Dallas, and it’s not a coincidence that Green Bay had its most productive offensive outing of the season as a result. Overall, it was a performance by Rodgers reminiscent of his previous two MVP seasons.

Play-action is a key staple of the Matt LaFleur offense, but its usage by the Packers has been hit-and-miss this season. In six out of Green Bay’s 10 games, the Packers have utilized play-action on fewer than 25% of their total snaps, which for some context, is below league average. Rodgers had also looked quite human prior to Week 10, ranking 26th in completion rate off play-action and 30th in yards per attempt.

Following the game, Rodgers mentioned that the run game can “definitely” be a formula that works for the Packers. Doing so will also have a positive trickle-down effect to the rest of the offense, specifically the passing game, and allow Green Bay to continue utilizing play-action at a higher rate and, hopefully, more effectively. From there, the shot plays will be more prevalent and likely successful–giving the Packers another important element that this offense has been missing dearly.

[Pckfn23]

there are reasons why our RB's are not stopped for no gain in 23's stats, and it sure as hell isn't because we have a great run blocking OL, or we wouldn't be last in red zone success.

I did not say we had a great run blocking OL. I specifically said they were "not too shabby." 2 different RBs do not make show up as 2 of the least stopped RBs for 1 or less yards without the offensive line doing some decent things.

In fact as a team the Packers were 8th in run block win rate:

Screenshot_20230708-095347.png (349.31 KiB) Viewed 375 times

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/345 ... s#rbwrteam

Red Zone success and run blocking are not mutually inclusive.

[Yoop]

Red Zone success and run blocking and not mutually inclusive.

again thanks for the stats, but I disagree, short yardage run stats do tell us how good our run blocking is, we do well running between the 20's because of our success with play action passing, we freeze the defensive front 7, specially the lbers and even the safety's which opens up run gaps, and that is the main reason we are better then other teams concerning no gain runs.

and you did bring this to say the OL is pretty good run blocking ( not to shabby) , and that stat does not tell us why our RB's are good either, there are reasons for success or failure that tabulate stats, and I'am just trying to high light those reasons, other wise imo stats are useless, stats can be found to support any opinion, that doesn't mean they portray the reality of anything, there just a bunch of numbers that hint at a conclusion, that imo are often misleading

[Pckfn23]

and you did bring this to say the OL is pretty good run blocking ( not to shabby)

Yes I did specifically say they were decent and not too shabby and doing some good things. Why is my opinion backed up by some evidence wrong?

Find the stats to support your opinion if you believe they can be used to support any opinion. Please show us that the Packers poor run blocking was the causation of poor red zone performance and thus the OL run blocking as a whole should be chastised.

[Pckfn23]

with play action passing, we freeze the defensive front 7, specially the lbers and even the safety's which opens up run gaps,

This is not what play action does. Play action, in its intent, causes LBs, and even DBs, to honor the run and opens up passing lanes, specifically in the middle of the field.

Play action does not open up run gaps.

Remember, the purpose of play action is to create the impression of a run play so the defense behaves accordingly, only to realize a tick too late that the quarterback has kept the ball and will pass it.

https://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/a ... ay-action/

Again play action doesn't fit into this conversation. Let's not continue down this road.

[Yoop]

with play action passing, we freeze the defensive front 7, specially the lbers and even the safety's which opens up run gaps,

This is not what play action does. Play action, in its intent, causes LBs, and even DBs, to honor the run and opens up passing lanes, specifically in the middle of the field.

Play action does not open up run gaps.

Remember, the purpose of play action is to create the impression of a run play so the defense behaves accordingly, only to realize a tick too late that the quarterback has kept the ball and will pass it.

https://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/a ... ay-action/

Again play action doesn't fit into this conversation. Let's not continue down this road.

your acting so polarized, as usual.

when you use play action (passing) as often as we normally do, the defense can't really know if it's a pass coming or a run, the Dallas game last season is a prime example of that, they had to honor our ability to pass out of a run look pre set that they couldn't just load the box, so again I disagree as I did before, play action not only helps the passing game, it also makes a defense hesitate from just driving every gap to stop the run, and if you don't think that helps our RB's ( who are also excellent) do well in that stat you brought, then your only fooling yourself.

[Pckfn23]

I am describing factually what play action is and is used for.

You are describing what a good passing attack does, not what play action does. Play action freezes 2nd level defenders to open up passing lanes. A team even has to have a decent running attack for play action to work well, just as the Dallas game exemplifies. If an offense is not running the ball well, the 2nd level defenders aren't going to honor the play action and bite on the run fake.

You are misinterpreting what play action is and is used for.

[go pak go]

So the argument I'm supposed to buy is that our run blocking was poor even though when compared to the league we were top ten in 1 yard or less run plays, top 10 in run block win rate %, average in total rush yards, stymied by a glaring absence of 20+ yard rushing plays because we ran play action 48% of the time in one game but fewer than 25% of the time (below league average) in all games leading up to Dallas supported by a Dairyland Express article?

[Yoop]

So the argument I'm supposed to buy is that our run blocking was poor even though when compared to the league we were top ten in 1 yard or less run plays, top 10 in run block win rate %, average in total rush yards, stymied by a glaring absence of 20+ yard rushing plays because we ran play action 48% of the time in one game but fewer than 25% of the time (below league average) in all games leading up to Dallas supported by a Dairyland Express article?

didn't say run blocking was poor, said that run blocking stats are deceptive because other factors help the run blocking stats look good or better.
as pckfn said, we need to find out success of run blocking in the red zone.

nice to know that you admit to just coming here to argue this actually a discussion forum, what I brought was conversation,

as that article says, we used play action to seldom prior to the Dallas game, against Dallas we passed less but used more PA when we did, I'am convinced beyond doubt that PA also helps us to be more proficient running the pig.

U's guys don't seem to be as convinced, and thats fine.

but do you ever bother to question stats? or the reason for what they are? I guess not