Cory's Corner: There's Nothing Wrong With Playing Old School
A solid running game and a stifling defense are two traits will travel well in the postseason.
The Packers went back in time on Sunday night.
Josh Jacobs ran the ball seven times in the opening drive as the Packers dared the Seahawks to stop them. Green Bay waltzed away with an easy 30-13 win at a charged up Lumen Field.
“I’m one of them players man, where it don’t matter if I’m dead tired, I feel like it’s an important play, or anything,” Jacobs said, who rushed 26 times for 94 yards and a touchdown. “I’m going to stay on the field, so I just grounded it out.”
The Packers could’ve told the Seahawks what direction Jacobs was running and it wouldn’t have mattered. Jacobs was a battering ram. The Seahawks have a solid defensive line and Jacobs went right through them.
Jacobs has 717 yards after contact with three games remaining this season with over 68 percent of his 1,147 rushing yards coming after contact. And 77 percent of his scheduled runs are between the tackles.
Jacobs also had four catches for 42 yards. That would be the second-most on the season — he had 32 carries and no receptions in a Week 2 win over Indianapolis.
This is exactly why the Packers brought Jacobs to Green Bay. He is a bellcow back in every sense of the word. Matt LaFleur has been praised for his presnap motion and the different ways that the football can go in different directions.
Jacobs is why the Packers are a real threat come playoff time. It is more than likely that the Packers will hit the road for the postseason and the two things that will always travel well are a good running game and a stifling defense.
And speaking of defense, the Packers were finally able to generate consistent pressure on an opposing quarterback. They tallied 13 pressures and seven sacks. Defensive Kingsley Enagbare had a pair of sacks to raise his season total to 4.5 and rookie linebacker Edgerrin Cooper had a team-high seven tackles, an interception and a sack. He is quickly becoming one of the most dynamic players on this roster.
In a passing league, Jordan Love attempted 27 passes. But since the running game is working so well, the play-action has turned into a beast. The Seahawks were overly concerned with stopping the run that even a short 7-yard pass can cause a big problem.
The Packers are in a great spot right now. The running game is being driven by an 18-wheeler that has a 12th gear and the defense is punishing offenses with tough hitting and firm tackling.
The running game has traditionally been a boring aspect of today’s game, but if a team doesn’t have a solid running game that sets up third-and-manageable, it is very hard to consistently win on the road.
“We’re going to have to lean into the run game, especially probably early on and have the compliments to it so we can keep a defense off balance,” LaFleur said back in August.
There are three regular season games and don’t expect the Packers to just lean into the run game. Expect them to fall head over heels.
PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHEESEHEAD NATION WEEKLY NEWSLETTER HERE.
__________________________
Cory Jennerjohn is a graduate from UW-Oshkosh and has been in sports media for over 15 years. He was a co-host on "Clubhouse Live" and has also done various radio and TV work as well. He has written for newspapers, magazines and websites. He currently is a columnist for CHTV and also does various podcasts. He recently earned his Masters degree from the University of Iowa. He can be found on Twitter: @Coryjennerjohn
__________________________
Comments (78)
Cheezehead72
December 17, 2024 at 07:19 am
I guess MLF read my comment where I said Run Matt Run. Let's try it again Keep it in Your Pocket, Matt.
PatrickGB
December 17, 2024 at 07:26 am
True. But it would be even better if our line was better at run blocking. But that just me picking nits. 😉
Packers0808
December 17, 2024 at 07:29 am
Are we ever happy as fans anymore?
Guam
December 17, 2024 at 07:53 am
Wouldn't be too critical of the O-line in this game or even the Detroit game. The running game was effective until both teams loaded the box with eight or more guys. No offensive line is going to run block well when seriously outnumbered. The OC needs to be aware of changes in defensive alignment and shift his play calling accordingly.
T7Steve
December 17, 2024 at 09:07 am
The trouble was that once they loaded (actually overloaded) the box, when it was a pass those guys just put pressure on the QB.
Still, they might have taken better advantage of them had it not been for a drop, an errant pass, and a receiver slipping on third downs in the second half. No excuse for the 4th and 2 though.
GregC
December 17, 2024 at 09:28 am
Yeah, they put so much pressure on the QB that they had zero sacks and Love had a QB rating of 128.3. All because our O-line sucks apparently.
T7Steve
December 17, 2024 at 10:09 am
It's a great pass blocking line for the most part. I'll give them that.
WestCoastPackerBacker
December 17, 2024 at 10:52 am
Zach Tom had a great run blocking game and Josh Meyers had a good one if you go by PFF grades. The friggin run game is working, unless the box is completely stacked, so why complain? Packers generally draft for pass blocking and the skills are a bit different. But this line is doing fine across the board.
Minniman
December 17, 2024 at 01:09 pm
Watch for the seam passes in the playoffs.
Musgrave will be back by then. Couple him with Kraft, Doubs and Reed and I foresee the Packers starting with Jacobs, then reverting to 2 TE sets and a quick, short passing game attacking the spaces that the blitzers leave.
MLF has yet to use this tactic this year - it has to come.
Bitternotsour
December 17, 2024 at 01:24 pm
would that MLF read your post...
Bitternotsour
December 17, 2024 at 10:08 am
except Love's numbers against the blitz were phenomenal. MLF just flailed in the second half.
T7Steve
December 17, 2024 at 10:12 am
Yes. Those 3 plays I mentioned above would have sustained drives and changed the perception of the whole second half. Turned a rout into a blowout.
Bitternotsour
December 17, 2024 at 10:30 am
an interesting observation. it wouldn't negate 1 yard dives into an 8 man box, but would change perceptions.
Leatherhead
December 17, 2024 at 02:45 pm
Steve, I have to agree with you on this. This is at the core of that voice in my head that keeps telling me the Packers are leaving points on the field. We stop ourselves.
Leatherhead
December 17, 2024 at 02:53 pm
Does this mean that it's a mistake to sacrifice coverage to get pressure against a good QB? Because that's what the TMQ taught me, and I've found it to be true. Why did Bellichick rush Manning with 2 and cover with 9?
IMO, you rush 4 and cover with the rest.
I don't really have an issue with the second half play calling being conservative. We already had 20, and it didn't look like Seattle was going to get to 20 unless we helped them by turning it over. I'm pretty happy now that in 4 straight games, Love hasn't thrown a pick AND we've scored 30 every time.
Guam
December 17, 2024 at 08:01 am
Do the Packers have a stifling defense? I think they have a good defense, but stifling may be a bit of literary license. They are eighth in points allowed per game and tenth in yards allowed per game which is pretty good, but not elite. If they can get Alexander, Bullard and Walker healthy and have no one else get hurt, they can get better. So maybe stifling is possible in the near future, certainly hope so.......
New Orleans and Chicago both have limited offenses (ranked #!8 and #25 respectively) and New Orleans may be without their starting QB next Monday so the Packer defense has a chance to be stifling in those games. The Vikings are going to be the big remaining regular season challenge and should be a good measuring stick for the Packer defense. Hopefully the Pack is completely healthy for that game.
Coldworld
December 17, 2024 at 08:37 am
It depends on which week you are talking about. When Hafley gets it right our D has been impressive. When he gets it wrong it has not been. Obviously, some opponents magnify that, but we have gone from good to bad and back over the season.
New Orleans led by Rattler don’t seem likely to give a meaningful measuring stick. The subsequent games will. Particularly the Vikings, where Hafley and his D dug us a big hole in the first meeting.
T7Steve
December 17, 2024 at 09:10 am
"but we have gone from good to bad and back over the season."
Done that during single games even.
Guam
December 17, 2024 at 10:07 am
No question Hafley has had some off weeks, but you have to expect that from a rookie DC. The opposing OC's get paid too and I think Hafley has generally done a very good job for his first season as a DC in the NFL. I will expect more from him and the Packer defense next year as both will be more experienced.
Leatherhead
December 17, 2024 at 09:18 am
Guam, after 14 games, the defense is averaging 20.5 ppg. That's exactly the same as last year.
Bitternotsour
December 17, 2024 at 10:10 am
that was without starting corners and with bad safeties.
LLCHESTY
December 17, 2024 at 10:15 am
If you're still trying to compare them to last year and that trainload of turkey QBs they played you can't see clearly. But even if you don't understand context the Packers D has 8 more turnovers than they had ALL of last year. Many years ago someone pointed out that a turnover was worth an average of 3.36 points and I'm sure that number hasn't changed that much, not to mention the momentum shift that comes with a turnover.
Love has thrown as many picks as he did all of last year and yet the offense is scoring 5 more points a game. Gee, I wonder if the defense having more turnovers has helped that number?
Have they lost a game by giving up over 200 yards on the ground, much less four games? Have they lost to any Tommy Devitos this year? I know you miss Barry but give it a rest, this year's defense is clearly better.
Bitternotsour
December 17, 2024 at 10:22 am
so, how exactly has that translated to improvement in ppg? because games are measured in points. not vibes.
LLCHESTY
December 17, 2024 at 10:41 am
I guess you missed the part where this year's offense is averaging 5 points more a game. More turnovers equals more points. On top of which QBs are important. You might notice a difference in names of QBs they played last year, when they played 8 games against QBs that are no longer on the same team(not counting Cousins because he was actually good last year), and this year.
But you can join Leatherhead and try to tell me context isn't important if you'd like. How many teams have they lost to this year that they definitely should have beat? Now look at last year.
Leatherhead
December 17, 2024 at 03:11 pm
So the improvement in our offense isn't because we got Jacobs, or because Kraft and Reed aren't rookies any more, or because Love has another year of experience? It's because of all the short fields?
I'm going to try to explain this one last time. You play 14 opponents, 3 of them twice. Now, normally 2/3 of everything is pretty close to average...a little above, a little below. So that would mean that under normal conditions, you'd play 2 or 3 games year against an elite QB,like Mahomes, and you'd play 2 or 3 against really weak QBs, like Rypien.
Goff twice, Cousins, Mahomes, Mayfield, Herbert,Wilson, Carr....all in the upper half. Yet, you set this arbitrary standard of "playing for a different team" (like Wilson and Fields, who are taking the Steelers to the playoffs) as some sort of compelling proof the Packers played a SIGNFICANTLY weaker than average lineup of QBs. If that's proof to you, fine, but it sure doesn't seem like it to me.
LLCHESTY
December 17, 2024 at 04:08 pm
Wilson and Fields changed teams because they weren't very good last year. Good QBs don't change teams unless they're really old or having a serious contract disagreement.
So 2 or 3 below average hunh? Ridder, Garappalo, Pickett, Mullins, DeVito, Rypien. Who is average in that group? Wilson and Fields were bad enough to get shipped out. Bryce Young had his only good game of the year against the Packers but certainly wasn't average for most of that year. Sure seems like last year might have been an outlier for number of bad QBs played.
Guam
December 17, 2024 at 10:21 am
Point taken LH, but context matters. Last year (2023) Packer opponents had a 47.3% win percentage while this year (2024) Packer opponents have a 52.6% win percentage. Last year they played the 24th toughest schedule in the league and this year they are playing the fourth toughest schedule in the league (year to date). Big difference in degree of difficulty!
Couple that with the fact that Joe Barry was a veteran DC (third year in GB and third stint as a DC in the league) while Hafley is a rookie DC in the league and there are significant reasons to believe Hafley has done a better job than Barry. Personally I also think Hafley's defense passes the eye test better than Barry's.
Bitternotsour
December 17, 2024 at 10:26 am
I wouldn't argue with the eye test, but I would note that Barry's defense would look a lot better with these safeties. Also, Valentine was a rookie last year, and Ballentine was on the field for way too many snaps. Regardless, Leatherhead's point is that last year's defense was good enough to get to the playoffs and destroy Dallas, the #1 offense in the league in the playoffs.
To win the Super Bowl, the offense needs to continue to ascend. This defense this year, right now, is good enough to get to the Super Bowl.
Guam
December 17, 2024 at 10:43 am
No question that McKinney has significantly helped this defense. Last year Barry had Rasul Douglas at CB for part of the year which Hafley hasn't had. Barry had a full year of Preston Smith while Hafley got part of a year. I'm not sure I see the veteran talent difference is as great as you see it.
I do believe the infusion of rookie talent has helped this defense, but with all rookies, that has also been an up and down experience. Some games they look great, other games not so much.
Last year's defense was average, this year's defense is good but not elite (yet). I'll take this year's defense every day.
Leatherhead
December 17, 2024 at 03:13 pm
'''Last year's defense was average, this year's defense is good"
Guam
""Last year's defense gave up 20.5 ppg; this year's defense gives up 20.5 ppg""
Leatherhead.
xxxxxc
Oh, and it stomped the league's best offense in the playoffs on their homefield. They held them to squat until we had a 27 point lead. The next week it went to SF and held the NFC Champion to 24 on their homefield.
IMO, the jury is still out on whether we've improved at all, or whether the improvement is because of the talent influx, or because of the coaching, or some of both.
Guam
December 17, 2024 at 10:34 pm
Context LH. This year's defense is allowing the same total points per game versus a much tougher schedule. Conclusion: this defense is better.
FITZCORE1252
December 18, 2024 at 04:23 pm
Dude, be honest, how are you related to Barry? Brother, Uncle, what is it? I've seen you dig your heals in defending the guy article after article using two dimensional logic and it's embarrassing. Context absolutely matters, you cannot just blanket say "points are the same as last year, we're no better", I mean, that's just ignorant. Context absolutely matters, schedule absolutely matters. Guam and Chesty attempted to explain that to you and your little sidekick to no avail so I won't waste my time trying. Has Hafley allowed (choose insignificant QB) to have a career day yet? Try using your eyeballs instead of cherry picked stats.
Just wanted to jump in to let you know your Barry shtick is tiresome and extremely flawed.
GPG
LLCHESTY
December 17, 2024 at 10:48 am
"Personally I also think Hafley's defense passes the eye test better than Barry's."
💯 Stafford missed one game last year and if it wouldn't have been against the Packers they wouldn't have been in the playoffs. Last year they gave 200 yards rushing four damn times and lost against teams led by QBs named Ridder and DeVito. Anybody that watched Ridder last night would wonder how in the hell that happens. Hafley's defense gets turnovers against QBs like that. Barry's? Well not so much. They played an unusual number of garbage QBs last year and lost an unusual number of games against them.
Leatherhead likes to point out the PPG but doesn't like to mention if Stafford had played in the Rams game and they scored their season average, instead of the 3 points put up by a QB that was cut the next day, the Packers would have finished 17th in scoring D and he wouldn't get to have this discussion.
Coldworld
December 17, 2024 at 11:10 am
Hafley is a rookie DC. His defense has looked like it’s driven by a novice it at times. However, he’s also showed his ability to adjust for opponents and adapt within games and he’s done this with personnel largely drafted for a different scheme and familiar with a different approach as well.
When Hafley has got it right the D has contributed more fundamentally to the outcome. When he’s got it wrong it has looked rather similar to Barry’s D’s. The difference is that it’s not largely the same each week or each half. As long as Hafley gets tactically more adroit from experience, he’s shown he can mix things up. He just needs to win those battles more.
He’s got promise, he’s not there yet. Barry was never able to fix his weaknesses, they recurred throughout games and over seasons. As an aside, given above conversations, I always wondered if any S would thrive in Barry’s scheme. Im not sure McKinney would have done so well under him. As long as Hafley doesn’t become as defensive as Barry became, he seems to have more upside. Thus far he’s done as much with less experience and less time to influence the roster and while undergoing a significant change in philosophy. That generally takes a season (and another draft) to fully bear fruit.
Overall Hafley has been no worse by stats or seeming consensus. The players seem happier, the turnovers are up, but he’s got the potential to build on that in future, which Barry didn’t show any signs of. Not a win yet, but a better place to be than we were in.
Guam
December 17, 2024 at 11:25 am
Good analysis CW and one I am very much in sync with. While I am enjoying this year, I very much am looking forward to the Packers of next year. I think both sides of the ball could be dynamic with the experience gained this year.
Leatherhead
December 17, 2024 at 11:57 am
And how much of that is because of Hafley, and how much of that is the addition of McKinney, Cooper, Williams, and Bullard?
I mean, if we had kept Barry, but added those players, would we have been worse than before? I don't think so.
LLCHESTY
December 17, 2024 at 12:34 pm
So you're saying if he had those guys he wouldn't have lost to Ridder, Pickett and DeVito? Good to know. Your ability to not acknowledge the crappy QBs they lost to is interesting.
If that's the case there will be people around the league that agree with you and he'll get another DC shot. Don't hold your breath.
Bitternotsour
December 17, 2024 at 01:04 pm
the only loss that mattered was to San Francisco and that was a failure of offense. like it or not the defense was not the problem last year. beating ridder, devito and pickett didn't fucking matter, unless you foolishly bet on football. The objective was to get to the playoffs and the mission was accomplished.
Guam
December 17, 2024 at 12:46 pm
See my response above to Bitter who raised much the same issue.
WestCoastPackerBacker
December 17, 2024 at 10:56 am
There's a lot more takeaways though, which gives the offense a boost! That makes a huge difference. Plus, you'd have to look at who they played last year and who they played this year and compare the offensive output of those teams.
At least DET didn't put up 40+ (or 50) against GB in either game. And don't you just trust this D more? To get a goal line stop? To hold a lead? To get the ball back? I do.
Leatherhead
December 17, 2024 at 12:02 pm
WC, I think the defense is good enough to win with. I felt the same way last year. We made a bunch of changes and IMO, we're not really better when it comes to the core stat: Points.
We whine and bitch about defense, but if we go out and score points, it usually doesn't matter if the defense was "dominant" or not. 13 playoff games last year and 12 of them were won by teams that hit 24 or more. So if you're not scoring at least that much, you aren't giving your team much of a chance. And defensively, if you can hold a team to 24, you've given your team a chance to win.
LLCHESTY
December 17, 2024 at 12:43 pm
He straight up refuses to put things in context or admit that more turnovers equal more points.
Bitternotsour
December 17, 2024 at 01:36 pm
More points equals more points, and context doesn't mean anything. Defensive stops are turnovers too, you just aren't sophisticated enough to understand that. The singular goal of the defense is to stop the other team from scoring. Style and context are completely meaningless.
The ultimate reference for the defense is points allowed and right now they're the same as last year. That must make your brain hurt. The final game will tell the story, and if it's a good story the final game will be in February. This defense is good enough to get to the Super Bowl, as was last years. It's all on the offense and LaFleur now.
Guam
December 17, 2024 at 02:56 pm
Do you really believe context doesn't matter?
LLCHESTY
December 17, 2024 at 04:15 pm
It's hopeless. 🙄 They can't admit when they're wrong.
The proof is in the pudding, if Hafley got canned after this year he'd have another DC job in days. I'd be shocked if Barry ever gets another DC shot. I've heard national writers talk about Barry's rep around the league and it's not good.
Guam
December 17, 2024 at 04:33 pm
I dunno LLC. Obviously I agree with your take on Hafley versus Barry, but I've also had many dialogues with LH and some with Bitter and find them to be very reasonable people. I just find denial of context to be a bit of a head scratcher - which is why I asked Bitter the question.
LLCHESTY
December 17, 2024 at 04:18 pm
"Defensive stops are turnovers too, you just aren't sophisticated enough to understand that."
Yes, they're called turnover ON DOWNS. Having to punt is a HUGE momentum shift that teams rarely recover from.
Minniman
December 17, 2024 at 01:12 pm
I think that their starting D grouping could be considered stifling - they just get thin once these guys go down injured.
Nobuttkiss
December 17, 2024 at 08:06 am
If we are going to meet the Lions or Vikings in the playoffs, we must be able to keep their offenses off the field with a strong running game using time consuming drives and touchdowns in the red zone instead of field goals. We will not compete with them in a passing shootout.
Coldworld
December 17, 2024 at 09:40 am
We need an O that can play a full game or a D that can get them off the field. Preferably both. We have had neither against the Lions twice, and the Vikings and Eagles.
When our O is firing, we can run with all three, but we’ve not really put together a consistent whole game on O yet this year and our D has been tactically outsmarted by and porous against really good offenses.
WestCoastPackerBacker
December 17, 2024 at 10:57 am
They didn't have Cooper or Alexander against DET. If they have those guys healthy in the post season, the D will look different.
LLCHESTY
December 17, 2024 at 12:45 pm
The Lions were missing a lot more players than the Packers were. They're having worse luck than the 2010 Packers, they've lost two of their top players for the year.
Spock
December 17, 2024 at 08:23 am
Uh, Cory, "Expect them to fall head over heels." would mean falling backwards! Not your best choice of sayings, lol.
RCPackerFan
December 17, 2024 at 08:26 am
That first drive was just impressive. They basically said try and stop us. The OL was blowing the DL off the ball, and Jacobs was running extremely hard. That might have been the most impressive drive of the season honestly. It just set the tone for the entire game.
We will see what happens this week and in the future, but Marshawn Lloyd could come back this week to practice. If he comes back I don't know how much he would really contribute. But he could add something to the RB position down the stretch. He brings juice that they currently don't have. Back in 2010 James starks came back and played 3 regular season games and went on to really help them win in the playoffs and eventually the super bowl. He was a vital piece. He brought something they didn't have at the time and it really balanced out the offense.
Now with GB this year they already have Jacobs who has been extremely good. One of the best in the league. He is their workhorse and really has been a huge part of the offense.. But for whatever reason they don't seem to want to give Brooks nor Wilson a lot of carries. Against Seattle Brooks had 1 carry, Wilson had 3. Against the Lions they each got 1 carry. Against the Dolphins Brooks got 3 carry's, Wilson got 2.
I think there is room for Lloyd to come back and add something. I think he could be a chess piece that LaFleur would love to use.
GregC
December 17, 2024 at 09:37 am
I've given up hoping they're going to reduce Jacobs' workload. They have used him as a bell cow back all season. If they were going to ease up on him, they would've done it by now. I think Jacobs lobbies very hard to carry the ball as often as possible and they will let him do that as long as his performance does not decline. It's hard to see much of a role for Marshawn Lloyd this season beyond an occasional change of pace--maybe a couple carries a game if anything.
T7Steve
December 17, 2024 at 10:15 am
It all depends on his blocking. No back will get on the field if he can't be dependable in that area.
LLCHESTY
December 17, 2024 at 10:23 am
They definitely could have used Lloyd to threaten the outside in the 2nd half Sunday instead of repeatedly trying to run into 5 man Tite fronts. Not adjusting to the Seahawks adjustment was ridiculous.
WestCoastPackerBacker
December 17, 2024 at 11:04 am
They did adjust. They started giving the ball to Reed and had a couple successful end arounds. And Jacobs had success in the 2nd half as well. He was stonewalled a few times but he had several runs of 4 yards each and had gained 6 before he unfortunately fumbled. So they did adjust. They didn't have a good third quarter, but they adjusted well enough to move the ball, keep the lead and score again. They did what they needed to do to win, period.
LLCHESTY
December 17, 2024 at 11:11 am
End arounds are plays you hope might break for big gains. Off tackle runs are plays you hope get you 4+ yards and keep the chains moving. You can't repeatedly run end arounds and hope they work.
Leatherhead
December 17, 2024 at 11:37 am
''''They didn't have a good third quarter, ''''
There's more to that than meets the eye. We won the toss, elected to receive, and took it in for an opening TD. That's the good. But it means the opponent gets the ball to start the 2nd half.
And then we went three and out when it was our turn. I've seen 14 point swings in the 3rd quarter. Sometimes, if they score right before the half, it's more than a 14 point swing.
I really like getting the ball at the start of the second half. A 30 minute game and you get it first. One long drive and now it's a 20 minute game.
Bitternotsour
December 17, 2024 at 03:01 pm
you also argue more convincingly that it doesn't matter when you score, it matters that you scored. taking the ball first helped take that crowd out of the game. scoring with a grind it out beat down disheartened the sideline and the stadium. echoing go pack go chants made that win all the sweeter.
Leatherhead
December 17, 2024 at 03:20 pm
That is the other side of it. But scoring on the opening possession isn't a given; getting the ball first in the second half is.
Choosing to receive in essence is saying "We think we can take it down the field and score.""
Oh, and though I generally believe it doesn't matter when, I do think that if you can score on your last possession it probably tips the scales.
GregC
December 17, 2024 at 03:47 pm
Scoring on the opening possession of the second half isn't a given either. You seem to be putting a lot of value on being able to look forward to getting the ball to start the second half. It is nice to be able to look forward to that as the first half nears its end, but if the other team scored first in the game, then you are just trying to match what they did. It really doesn't matter a whole lot. In this case, I liked the decision to get the ball first with a chance to score a TD and deflate the crowd, which is exactly what the Packers did.
Bitternotsour
December 17, 2024 at 03:04 pm
I'm with you. Jacobs wants work. I'd argue it helps his conditioning to play.
Maybe if they can blow out a team in the first half Lloyd can get some snaps. There's only one football, and there's a whole hell of a lot of playmakers hungry for the ball.
I'm more interested in how they find snaps for Musgrave than Lloyd.
TXCHEESE
December 17, 2024 at 08:51 am
Love what Jacobs brings to the offense, but would like to get Brooks and Wilson more carries, Packers need to keep Jacobs' legs fresh for the long haul. They aren't Jacobs, but they run really hard when they get their number called.
Latimore might really enhance the perimeter running game. Just looking at some of his college film, he looks like he's got that burst and elusiveness to take advantage of small openings.
Agree with Cory. There is absolutely nothing wrong with just running and controlling the game. No need to overthink it. However, it took a little while for MLF to call Reed's number when the Hawks started crowding the tackle boxes.
LLCHESTY
December 17, 2024 at 04:37 pm
Jacobs has proven he can handle a heavy workload so I'm not too worried about him burning out in the playoffs but it would be nice to get Lloyd back and give Jacobs a couple easy weeks. Watch out for next year though, it's pretty common for RBs to drop off a year after a heavy workload. Hopefully Lloyd can stay healthy and give them a inside/outside threat.
Coldworld
December 17, 2024 at 09:36 am
There is nothing wrong with playing old school, as long as you have the ability to change gear as well, which we do. However, if we are really going to do this against good teams when it matters, going old school means building in the trenches to do it when it’s tough. We haven’t. We are relying on a freakish number of yards after contact that likely can’t be sustained long term or against the best.
We also need to show we can exploit defenses adapting. Our intermediate passing game needs to reemerge, as does outside the tackle running by non receivers, for example. What one can do against average teams isn’t a yardstick. Until we do it to a good team playing well, it’s not real. Thus far we have not.
Bitternotsour
December 17, 2024 at 10:14 am
A quibble. Seattle was a division leader, is that not a good team? The play calling stalled in the second half, not the offense. Weapons abound, but you can't succeed with a bad plan. I'm ever hopeful that things continue to develop, and that includes play calling.
WestCoastPackerBacker
December 17, 2024 at 11:16 am
SEA is a good team, and they had been playing well. From an article about their defense: " Over the past four games, the Seahawks have allowed just 297.3 total yards and 15.5 points per game, and it's helped them take the lead in the cut-throat NFC West." No, they're not the Eagles, Vikings or Lions defense, but GB has put up 29, 29 and 31 points against those defenses this season. And they're getting healthy at the right time, with Doubs back and maybe Musgrave too. I don't think we've seen this offense get anywhere near its potential but there's time to gel before the post season.
LLCHESTY
December 17, 2024 at 04:41 pm
I'd really like to see them drop 40 on somebody before the playoffs. Just have everything click for a game to give them the confidence they can do that.
ricky
December 17, 2024 at 10:30 am
Jacobs didn't get all those yards by himself. The OL opened up huge holes for him in the first half, and Jacobs then had time to gain a head of steam as he ran. The second half was a different story.
"Jacobs was involved from the get-go with 44 scrimmage yards on seven carries and two catches on the opening drive, which concluded with a one-yard touchdown run. He finished the first half with 17 touches for 111 yards but struggled after halftime. Jacobs went backward in the third quarter with four carries for minus-5 yards, then fumbled in the fourth. He racked up some more yardage as the Packers kept the clock running with the lead but was stuffed on fourth-and-2 with 5:55 left. Jacobs came six rushing yards shy of his fourth 100-yard rushing performance, but he's up to 12 rushing touchdowns in 14 games with the Packers and will look to add to that total against the Saints in Week 16." (The Fantasy Footballers podcast)
LLCHESTY
December 17, 2024 at 10:33 am
LaFleur acknowledged he had a bad 2nd half calling plays so hopefully acknowledgement leads to quicker adjustments in the future. It looked like they had taken off tackle runs out of the playbook. Time to have some pin and pull plays on hand to run if they face a team willing to sell out to stop inside runs. That's also a perfect time for a play action pass or two.
When facing a top team in the playoffs going 3 and out, fumble and then 3 and out could mean watching a lead evaporate.
Coldworld
December 17, 2024 at 11:17 am
LaFleur does that relatively frequently. It’s very nice he accepts it, but ultimately, if he can’t be more consistent, the acceptance gets us nowhere. The issue in the last two games is that what he wasn’t doing seemed pretty obviously the conventional response to what his opponents were doing with stacked boxes. That’s pretty hard to understand.
Perhaps he needs to have someone who will stand up tell him he’s missing the woods for the trees at times? That person would be valuable on challenges too. Overall, really good play callers do not eschew tested solutions. He either being too clever by half or is too wrapped up in his own vision, not play. Maybe both. His calling deficiencies are too common.
Bitternotsour
December 17, 2024 at 12:24 pm
ostensibly it's the new offensive consultant hire coach Saleh. I support that hire.
Coldworld
December 17, 2024 at 06:59 pm
Saleh goes home at weekends supposedly. He’s not much help on the sidelines from there.
Bitternotsour
December 17, 2024 at 07:30 pm
i did not know that...
NFLfan
December 17, 2024 at 10:39 am
I think Jacobs is being over-worked, he's not a big power back. I would prefer to rely on him less against the weaker Saints team as he needs to be healthy for the Vikes. Shanahan rode McCaffrey too hard, IMO.
During one of his more recent games he was 'cramping all over'--(his words) and had to go to the locker room mid-game-likely for IV fluids
Coldworld
December 17, 2024 at 11:20 am
If we get out ahead on the Saints, and we should, then it’s time to run Wilson primarily for the remainder of the regular season. Limit Jacobs snaps to a few early drives to keep him in rhythm and then rest him and use Wilson as the bell cow.