Why not spread it out more?

by ericforeman04 on Nov 1, 2009 9:10 PM CST

I happen to live in Eugene, OR and I saw the Oregon Ducks destroy one of the best defenses USC on Halloween . Oregon runs a spread option most plays and is always in the shotgun formation. Then whilst viewing the Green Bay Minnesota game the first half McCarthy had Rodgers under center dropping back with tight formations. Neither the run game or the pass game was there. Then comes the 2nd half and the Packers put 3 or more receivers out and Aaron starts picking the defense apart. Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the packers ran a form of the spread back in 2007 with great success with Flarve or whatever his name was. With a shotgun spread i see Aaron Rodgers explioting blitzs, the wideouts getting Yards after Catch in the open field, Rodgers getting yards with his legs, better protection, I also think the spread will allow Grant this use his speed and power better in the open field. What do you guys think? Is my analysis asinine (stupid)? Perhaps. I read an article in the Wall street journal talking about why scoring is higher than average this season and part of it is the use of the spread offense. I wish we'd go with more spread earlier in the game and on first downs but I could be wrong. Not all teams can run spread because they don't have a good enough QB and HB but I think we do. Aaron Rodgers is our best player and and he does better (I think) with the spread. I have no stats to back me up so I don't know if I'm right or not. What is your opinion?

Tweet Comment 4 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Great idea in theory

Won’t work in execution. The problem with the spread is we need to keep extra guys in to block at the moment since we don’t have the protection necessary to let Rodgers find somebody to throw to. Second problem is who CAN Rodgers throw to? The spread (or as we called it, “The Fab Five”) relies on the fact that not only do we have the talent to give Rodgers time to throw, but that there’s enough depth with our receivers to give Rodgers options.

At the moment, with Jordy Nelson injured and Brett Swain lost for the season (not that Swain was even a really special receiver or anything- nothing like the rapport Rodgers and the released Ruvell Martin had- but his loss was felt on special teams today!) we don’t have the personnel to run it. Driver got hurt and got up at one point in the game today. So did Jennings. Jones escaped unharmed, but do we really want to risk more pain to our receivers? Maybe if we had Finley and Nelson healthy, but right now it’s not worth it.

Would’ve liked to see that idea against the Vikes’ secondary, though.

by vitaminx on Nov 1, 2009 9:44 PM CST reply actions

But we were short WR's

The spread is good, but we were short WR’s (nelson, swain). This was a tough game to watch. They did finally put Jake Allen in later, but it was too late. If anything they should have just left him in to give Minnisota something else to think about.

by GBfan73 on Nov 1, 2009 9:59 PM CST reply actions

Good thinking but..

Like turd pointed out we were without Nelson and Finley, who are each big assets to our passing game. But the main reason we can’t always do this is our offensive line.

Once we get a real o-line, I would suspect that we will spread it out much more. Even maybe when Tauscher comes back, but who knows.

by packallday555 on Nov 1, 2009 10:32 PM CST reply actions

McCarthy doesn't run a college-style spread

He runs a 5reciever set of his own design. He stil calls it when he has the recievers and it seems like Aaron’s more effective than Favre was using it. Still though, it’s more of a gimmick than anything.

by Donald Driver on Nov 2, 2009 4:26 PM CST reply actions