Packers Huddle

Madcity_matt wrote: ↑

11 Aug 2023 09:15

Yoop wrote: ↑

11 Aug 2023 08:01

your right CD, I'am probably wrong about slow pace going forward, we'll see.

during the McCarthy era we where a faster pace team early at least, then we gradually slowed it some, since Lafleur we lead the league with slower pace, but with excellent success, with Love we may see a increase in pace

On the complete other end of the spectrum, the Green Bay Packers had the league’s slowest offense by seconds per play at 32.83 in neutral situations — though that is the fastest time for the 32nd ranked team since the 2013 season. While the Cardinals “don’t want to sit there and diagnose the defense,” that’s exactly what Aaron Rodgers and the Packers did. It’s ok to be the slowest offense in the league when that offense is also first in yards and points per drive. That could be repeatable in 2021 with Rodgers back under center, but speed could be needed as an additional weapon if a younger, inexperienced quarterback is forced to be the starter.

https://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/a ... -prescott/

There's a big difference between utilizing the play clock and expending it to .5 seconds. You can run it down to 5 seconds each time and still be a slow tempo offense. Running it until you take a penalty or call a timeout is closer than it needs to be.

plenty of last years issues concerning running the play clock out are on Lafleur getting the play to Rodgers on schedule, and Rodgers getting all the players up to speed on there assignments, we had 7 or 8 different OL man through the season and 3 rookie receivers in the mix.

again we where one of the most efficient offenses in the league for Lafleur first 3 seasons, so last seasons issues where not consistent with prior success.

the game evolves, up tempo and speedy pace for us started the last decade, but has been on the decline ever since, we use more deception now to confuse the defense, versus the more simpler just run and I'll get you the ball, more backfield motion takes more clock, same with jet sweeps.

I think if Love can deceiver the defense Lafleur will keep using most of the clock, ball control, long time consuming drives keeps our defense on the side lines and theres sweating bullets and wearing down, we always have known that if ya got a lead then ya milk the clock, why people think that should only happen in the 4th quarter makes no sense, and that if ya have a lead keep pouring it on ala the Sean Payton approach, but he hasn't even been as successful as we have, same with Andy Reid, obviously both tendencies have success, and also failure, ya probably do need a very good QB for either to work, but the analytics don't lie, and that college graph shows that slower pace has lead to more efficient offense production.

TheSkeptic wrote: ↑

11 Aug 2023 10:10

Yoop wrote: ↑

10 Aug 2023 17:43

Labrev wrote: ↑

10 Aug 2023 16:53

Yeah I saw his post.
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1339&start=40

He brought a link with a table showing that the Packers run the fewest plays per game.

If the claim is that we run the fewest plays per game, sure, I accept that fact, given the evidence.

As to the claim that MLF specifically liked to run the clock down, that is a separate claim that is yet unsubstantiated by any evidence, because it is not clear that Rodgers did so only at MLF's direction, if both were in agreement, or if it's a Rodgers thing.

I think it's a Rodgers thing among other reasons because this practice predates LaFleur; we were doing it under McCarthy (who is not a Kubiak disciple like LaFleur).

Cdragon replied saying he thinks it's a bad idea. BSA replied with an argument in favor of it, but his reply even starts by conceding that it "may or may not" be a bad idea, admitting that there *are* some cons with running the clock down that far.

the only cons that I can see are not getting the snap off and forcing a time out or a penalty, or if your QB is so inexperienced that he can't make adjustment once the helmet speaker is shut off, which could happen with Love.

again you are going to see more and more teams using up the 30 second clock, just to many advantages not to, it helps every facet of the game when successful.

Of course. And it hurts every facet of the game when it is not successful

great conclusion, what about 33-10 record to you is not successful, prior to everything involved that made it unsuccessful last year( OL flux, and youth at WR) we had one of the most, if not the most efficient offenses in the league 3 years on end

Yoop wrote: ↑

11 Aug 2023 08:01

your right CD, I'am probably wrong about slow pace going forward, we'll see.

during the McCarthy era we where a faster pace team early at least, then we gradually slowed it some, since Lafleur we lead the league with slower pace, but with excellent success, with Love we may see a increase in pace

On the complete other end of the spectrum, the Green Bay Packers had the league’s slowest offense by seconds per play at 32.83 in neutral situations — though that is the fastest time for the 32nd ranked team since the 2013 season. While the Cardinals “don’t want to sit there and diagnose the defense,” that’s exactly what Aaron Rodgers and the Packers did. It’s ok to be the slowest offense in the league when that offense is also first in yards and points per drive. That could be repeatable in 2021 with Rodgers back under center, but speed could be needed as an additional weapon if a younger, inexperienced quarterback is forced to be the starter.

https://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/a ... -prescott/

this is a college analysis, so take that however you like, it shows that against popular believe efficiency declines when a offense runs more plays.

https://www.sharpcollegefootball.com/po ... tempo-myth

If you are using pace as your only gimmick eventually some D is just going to sit there and clean your clock like always happened to Oregon. But if you've got a HOF QB a perennial top 5 O, then I want as many plays as I can reasonably get. If you are a bad O I'd expect your efficiency to decline as the pressure mounts and you increase the pace. But if you've got the guy who turns the ball over so rarely that it has been argued as a fault of his. (Not aggressive enough) Giving that HOFer some extra plays should lead to an increase in efficiency, since the D gets gassed.

Regardless, it will be interesting to see how much this style changes if at all with Love at QB. In college, Love primarily ran a no huddle offense out of the shotgun, so he may have more of a preference for an up-tempo style of running the offense, but that was years ago, he has learned to do a lot of stuff he didn't do in college, and may have evolved a bit as a player.

I'm sure we will see instances of the offense running the clock down to the final seconds, and I am fine with that from time to time, but I think we will see noticeably more up-tempo offense than seasons past.

just found this concerning outside stretch zone runs, which Lafleur brought here, and we saw a explosion of run success as a result, good read.

The Next Phase of the NFL’s Scheme Wars Is Upon Us

https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2022/6/15 ... -evolution

Well, now that my nemesis Rodgers is long gone, I can restart my Packer fandom. Juck the Fets!

Cdragon wrote: ↑

11 Aug 2023 11:35

Yoop wrote: ↑

11 Aug 2023 08:01

your right CD, I'am probably wrong about slow pace going forward, we'll see.

during the McCarthy era we where a faster pace team early at least, then we gradually slowed it some, since Lafleur we lead the league with slower pace, but with excellent success, with Love we may see a increase in pace

On the complete other end of the spectrum, the Green Bay Packers had the league’s slowest offense by seconds per play at 32.83 in neutral situations — though that is the fastest time for the 32nd ranked team since the 2013 season. While the Cardinals “don’t want to sit there and diagnose the defense,” that’s exactly what Aaron Rodgers and the Packers did. It’s ok to be the slowest offense in the league when that offense is also first in yards and points per drive. That could be repeatable in 2021 with Rodgers back under center, but speed could be needed as an additional weapon if a younger, inexperienced quarterback is forced to be the starter.

https://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/a ... -prescott/

this is a college analysis, so take that however you like, it shows that against popular believe efficiency declines when a offense runs more plays.

https://www.sharpcollegefootball.com/po ... tempo-myth

If you are using pace as your only gimmick eventually some D is just going to sit there and clean your clock like always happened to Oregon. But if you've got a HOF QB a perennial top 5 O, then I want as many plays as I can reasonably get. If you are a bad O I'd expect your efficiency to decline as the pressure mounts and you increase the pace. But if you've got the guy who turns the ball over so rarely that it has been argued as a fault of his. (Not aggressive enough) Giving that HOFer some extra plays should lead to an increase in efficiency, since the D gets gassed.

thing is though, Pace is only part of it, particular play success has to accompany it, the reason we lead the league with fewest 3rd down plays is obviously do to our success on 1st and 2nd down, plus we do a lot of motion and other deceptive backfield shenanigans pre snap along with burning clock forcing defenses to adjust to that stuff

we need to throw out last year, simply because to many variables interrupted our success from the 3 previous seasons.

to me Lafleur revamped our offense, and I don't think he gets enough credit for it, or blame, depending which side of this pace argument your on, imo this is not a Rodgers thing, Lafluer brought outside stretch zone run schemes, and burning all the play clock has amounted to one of the most proficient offense in the league, why in gods name would he throw that out simply because he has a young QB, we may not take the clock to tick zero as much as with Rodgers, but there are to many advantages doing it for him to abandon that plan.

this forum is loony tunes for the last 4 or 5 years ya'all wanted to run, run, run, and depend on defense to win games, which is the definition of slow ( boring to the point of slumber) pace football, now ya want run and gun, make up your minds

Sump_pump wrote: ↑

11 Aug 2023 13:26

Well, now that my nemesis Rodgers is long gone, I can restart my Packer fandom. Juck the Fets!

Welcome.

Just so the Fets don't discover how badly they got jucked until the 65% is in the books. It will be nice to get a top 5 pick.

TheSkeptic wrote: ↑

11 Aug 2023 14:01

Sump_pump wrote: ↑

11 Aug 2023 13:26

Well, now that my nemesis Rodgers is long gone, I can restart my Packer fandom. Juck the Fets!

Welcome.

Just so the Fets don't discover how badly they got jucked until the 65% is in the books. It will be nice to get a top 5 pick.

Jets will happily accept an early-exit playoff run. Getting to the playoffs at all is their SuperBowl.

false bravado, very likely the Jets make the PO's, and we end up with a 2nd round pick, the jets didn't go all in to be happy with just going 500.

and who gives up being a fan of a team who has a 4 time MVP first ballot HOF QB, who has been the face of the franchise for 15 seasons and has been considered by most people who actually know this game to be one of if not the best passer in team history? that to me sounds like a spoiled rotten Packer fan course imho there is no shortage of those around.

Yoop wrote: ↑

11 Aug 2023 15:50

false bravado, very likely the Jets make the PO's, and we end up with a 2nd round pick, the jets didn't go all in to be happy with just going 500.

I said they will just be happy making the playoffs, not going 500. It's really not all that impressive, though. Jimmy Garopolo probably could do it on that team.

Yoop wrote: ↑

11 Aug 2023 15:50

false bravado, very likely the Jets make the PO's, and we end up with a 2nd round pick, the jets didn't go all in to be happy with just going 500.

and who gives up being a fan of a team who has a 4 time MVP first ballot HOF QB, who has been the face of the franchise for 15 seasons and has been considered by most people who actually know this game to be one of if not the best passer in team history? that to me sounds like a spoiled rotten Packer fan course imho there is no shortage of those around.

Wow you seem really smart, I’m sure you mom is proud of you and your success on this packers blog! Maybe if I play my cards right I can be a super duper fan like you :-)

Yoop wrote: ↑

11 Aug 2023 15:50

false bravado, very likely the Jets make the PO's, and we end up with a 2nd round pick, the jets didn't go all in to be happy with just going 500.

and who gives up being a fan of a team who has a 4 time MVP first ballot HOF QB, who has been the face of the franchise for 15 seasons and has been considered by most people who actually know this game to be one of if not the best passer in team history? that to me sounds like a spoiled rotten Packer fan course imho there is no shortage of those around.

So the Jets are going to the Playoffs with Zach Wilson huh?

go pak go wrote: ↑

11 Aug 2023 19:45

Yoop wrote: ↑

11 Aug 2023 15:50

false bravado, very likely the Jets make the PO's, and we end up with a 2nd round pick, the jets didn't go all in to be happy with just going 500.

and who gives up being a fan of a team who has a 4 time MVP first ballot HOF QB, who has been the face of the franchise for 15 seasons and has been considered by most people who actually know this game to be one of if not the best passer in team history? that to me sounds like a spoiled rotten Packer fan course imho there is no shortage of those around.

So the Jets are going to the Playoffs with Zach Wilson huh?

I believe the plan is jets win the toss, receive, rodgers gets 4 scores in the first half and sits the rest of the game.

Makes sense.

Yoop wrote: ↑

10 Aug 2023 07:22

well one of those 1.5 seasons was the cancelled covid off season, he looked more prepared when he played last year.

I agree that Love looked improved last season but it was a very small sample size against defenses that didn't game plan for him. As I have mentioned before I need to see him perform in the regular season before making an evaluation.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

10 Aug 2023 07:55

The effect a QB has on the lines ability to pass block is not that significant. He can't reset it or change their formation. He can identify possible blitzes, but an NFL offensive line should recognize them on their own. The only thing a QB can do to adjust to defensive alignments is move a RB or TE. A QBs greatest weapon against blitzes is identifying where they are coming from and getting the ball out quickly to take advantage of the blitz.

A quarterback can definitely change the protection scheme at the LOS. It's impossible for offensive linemen who don't see the defense moving around pre-snap to do that.

Cdragon wrote: ↑

10 Aug 2023 11:15

Pace is seconds between plays. The numbers cited don't jive with numbers at Footballoutsiders who give various times for total game, halves and trailing, leading, tied.

The numbers posted above only include plays from the first three quarters though.

Labrev wrote: ↑

10 Aug 2023 16:53

As to the claim that MLF specifically liked to run the clock down, that is a separate claim that is yet unsubstantiated by any evidence, because it is not clear that Rodgers did so only at MLF's direction, if both were in agreement, or if it's a Rodgers thing.

I think it's a Rodgers thing among other reasons because this practice predates LaFleur; we were doing it under McCarthy (who is not a Kubiak disciple like LaFleur).

As I have posted before, the numbers from Football Outsiders strongly suggest it's a MLF thing. Since 2019, the Packers ranked 31st (2022), 32nd ('20 and '21) and 28th ('19) in seconds per play. In the last four seasons with McCarthy being the head coach they finished 8th (2018), 12th ('17), 25th ('16) and 10th ('15).

go pak go wrote: ↑

10 Aug 2023 21:10

I think advantages of getting snaps off timely and even no huddle include:

1. More chances at the bat for an explosive play - huge for passing teams (which is why KC runs a LOT of plays)

The Chiefs only ran the 11th most plays on offense last season. Out of the 10 teams that ran the most plays only three of them finished in the top 10 of points scored as well. On the other hand five of them finished 21st or worse.

Cdragon wrote: ↑

10 Aug 2023 21:26

Of the last 10 Superbowl participants. 7 would fall into the faster pace side of the game. The faster pace teams have won 4 of the last 5 Lombardis. So while you can be successful slow playing the game any copy catting HC might try to speed up their game.

Only three of those 10 teams were in the top 10 in pace though.

Yoop wrote: ↑

11 Aug 2023 15:50

false bravado, very likely the Jets make the PO's, and we end up with a 2nd round pick, the jets didn't go all in to be happy with just going 500.

The Packers will receive a first round pick as long as Rodgers plays 65% of the snaps. The Jets' success doesn't make a difference.

I don't think a day-late thread is warranted, but I just listened to a report on our most recent practice. Love had a good day, 17/22 + 4 TDs. What really got my attention was, after a nice game against the Bengals a few days ago, Rasheed Walker took all LT1 reps. Very interesting....

Labrev wrote: ↑

14 Aug 2023 08:43

I don't think a day-late thread is warranted, but I just listened to a report on our most recent practice. Love had a good day, 17/22 + 4 TDs. What really got my attention was, after a nice game against the Bengals a few days ago, Rasheed Walker took all LT1 reps. Very interesting....

I saw that, too. And Nijman was healthy.
Bakh having his "rest day" which isn't how rest days work since it's been several days in a row
And Caleb Jones (who had spent a bunch of time there) is injured right now.

So it might mean significantly less IF Nijman wasn't also available. As it is, that's a pretty clear elevation to opportunity. Let's see what he does with it.

CWIMM wrote: ↑

14 Aug 2023 03:58

A quarterback can definitely change the protection scheme at the LOS. It's impossible for offensive linemen who don't see the defense moving around pre-snap to do that.

Offensive linemen would definitely see the defense moving around and they would be talking amongst themselves to point out possible blitzers or stunts. The QB helps to point those out, but there is not much to really adjust among the linemen. They have areas in pass protection because of stunts and blitzes. If they adjusted to what looked like a blitz and picked a man, if that blitz is a feint, and instead the DL ran a stunt, it would screw the blocking. QBs don't have much influence on how the offensive line pass blocks as presnap might not be what happens postsnap.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

14 Aug 2023 09:07

Labrev wrote: ↑

14 Aug 2023 08:43

I don't think a day-late thread is warranted, but I just listened to a report on our most recent practice. Love had a good day, 17/22 + 4 TDs. What really got my attention was, after a nice game against the Bengals a few days ago, Rasheed Walker took all LT1 reps. Very interesting....

I saw that, too. And Nijman was healthy.
Bakh having his "rest day" which isn't how rest days work since it's been several days in a row
And Caleb Jones (who had spent a bunch of time there) is injured right now.

So it might mean significantly less IF Nijman wasn't also available. As it is, that's a pretty clear elevation to opportunity. Let's see what he does with it.

I was thinking on this too. Could be everything from Jones is simply earning those reps and is outplaying Nijman, or to if they want to have Tom at center at Nijman at RT, could they rely on Jones to pop in at LT for a game if need without playing crazy musical chairs.

So basically I take it to mean the coaching staff is pleased with Jones and is looking to reward him and he is in longer term plans, and it may or may not be related to Nijman or Myers.

BF004 wrote: ↑

14 Aug 2023 11:13

I was thinking on this too. Could be everything from Jones is simply earning those reps and is outplaying Nijman, or to if they want to have Tom at center at Nijman at RT, could they rely on Jones to pop in at LT for a game if need without playing crazy musical chairs.

So basically I take it to mean the coaching staff is pleased with Jones and is looking to reward him and he is in longer term plans, and it may or may not be related to Nijman or Myers.

Assuming you mean Walker... but given that Jones was doing the same before his injury, you might mean Jones--or both.

I definitely thought Walker looked more the part than Jones in the very limited action I saw of them Friday (before Jones got injured)

Walker is a guy who always had the ability, but I questioned his competitive fire/demeanor/attitude. Wondered if he'd come around or go the way of Jamon Meredith or countless others who just never had the love of physicality that is required to be an elite NFL offensive lineman.

These are signs in a positive direction on that front. Excited to see how it goes.