Packers Game Ball Recap: Lions Upset Packers, 7-3
The big story was the concussion suffered by QB Aaron Rodgers. Will he play next week? We'll have to wait and see.
Who was the Green Bay Packers MVP on offense? Feel free to suggest your suggestions in the comments, but I didn't notice anyone as it was a complete offensive collapse. Maybe WR Jordy Nelson or WR James Jones because they didn't make any big mistakes.
On the other hand, the defense played very well. The Lions were able to run the ball, but the Packers were often playing with only two defensive lineman, and giving them some room to run. They forced QB Drew Stanton to make some passes, and they shut their passing game down (except on the Lions touchdown drive).
74 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
TIM MASTHAY
For scoring our only points.
"The Green Bay Packers never lost a football game. They just ran out of time." -Vince Lombardi
He's up in the standings
- in total average yardage and #18 in net average and inside the 20. Not top 10 but considering we were in the upper 20’s in prior seasons he has overall been an upgrade.
the only way we can make the playoffs is if Chicago loses their next three games.
We will lose to New England, but we’ll have to beat New York and Chicago. The Bears need to lose today, to the Jets, and hopefully us. That’s the only way I see this working out for us.
by ThroughBeingCool on Dec 12, 2010 3:23 PM CST reply actions
ummmm wild card?
we still in good position for the wild card
how so?
aren’t New York, New Orleans, and Tampa Bay all ahead of us? I mean it could still happen, but after today I have about zero confidence left in this team.
by ThroughBeingCool on Dec 12, 2010 3:36 PM CST up reply actions
take the staring qb off any of those teams and theyd look just as bad
by nfcnorth21 on Dec 12, 2010 3:47 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
no, as it isn't going to happen, or no as in we'll make the playoffs still?
by ThroughBeingCool on Dec 12, 2010 3:34 PM CST up reply actions
We have close a 50% chance of making the playoffs at this point.
It would be nice to see the Bears lose a lot, but our playoff chances aren’t directly related to them losing. If we want to win the division, yes they need to lose.
by Bush League All Star on Dec 12, 2010 3:37 PM CST up reply actions
Pretty much we have to beat the Bears and the Giants to make it.
If we lose to the Pats, it doesn’t hurt too much (though that is not to say it doesn’t hurt at all). But if we take care of those teams, our chances to make the playoffs go up to 70%
by Bush League All Star on Dec 12, 2010 3:39 PM CST up reply actions
No One
I abstain from voting. It’s my freedom as an American!
Once again... missed challenges and cold starts
Different circumstances this time, but I will stand by my previously attacked viewpoint that the Packers must find a better way and better flow of information in their play-challenge system.
Another deadly cold start on offense. This teams inability to get into a game time flow and rhythm represents serious flaws in preparation and warm up procedures. Just like last week, they looked like the just woke up and got out of bed.
McCarthy? I have been losing confidence.
by docg on Dec 12, 2010 4:05 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
How do you purpose they improve the "flow of information in their play challenge system"?
It’s not like they have the ability to sit 20 guys in a cave surrounded by every view of the game. They’re restricted by the replays shown on television and in the stadium. I don’t know how people think the system can be optimized. It’s not like MM is out there throwing the challenge flag 5 seconds after the next play has begun, which would suggest that he’s not getting the info from the booth soon enough. The booth is at the mercy of the views available to the general public.
Towlieppan: "You wanna throw high?"
It is usually annoying to hear criticisms
from people who do not provide options and alternatives to what is being criticized. This behavioral tendency makes politics and politicians so annoying.
At the same time, as someone who specializes in problem-solving, I can tell you that there are always ways to improve the flow of information and data in any work environment. No, I do not have the specific answer, but If it was my business, I would find a legal way to improve the flow of things.
For sure, the home field control of replay information is just plain wrong, and potentially corrupt.
Ok, that's fine if you are concerned about the home field control of replay information
But that isn’t something that the Packers can improve as a team. You’re asking the Packers to improve on something where they have no control over the rate at which data is introduced. I just don’t see how it’s going to happen.
If you want my idea, it’s that the NFL should adopt the college method of instant replay.
Towlieppan: "You wanna throw high?"
Flow of information
is a problem, but it seems to be a league-wide problem that the league should address. I just don’t see how the Packers organization can improve their own flow (Flomax?) in isolation. My beef is that MM has said the staff has a set of criteria for when to challenge. I think they need to evaluate that and think hard about changing it to make sure they have the best chance to win football games.
Having said that, I agree with Greg that I think the NFL should adopt the college system. The goal should be to get as many important calls right as possible. It was a mistake to make replay another strategic part of the game by limiting challenges and tying them to timeouts.
My overriding argument for a college-type replay system
Is that getting the correct call made should not be the job of the head coach. It should be the job of the officiating crew.
Towlieppan: "You wanna throw high?"
My "flaw"
is that I never accept the convenient belief that “there is no way to change or improve” a certain situation or problem. Professionally and in life, I just view those types statements as excuses.
Trust me, there are ALWAYS ways to do things better, especially when dealing with data and information flow. When a disease or problem takes life from a person or success from a business, the first step is refusing to accept the status quo (unless failure is king). The same psychological traits of successful people play into the processes of problem-solving and improving things in life.
From a coaching stand point, an unwillingness to acknowledge and/or address flaws and problems also reflects back to the psychology of the leader. Successful people do not get lucky. Successful people believe, inspire, take care of details, and do a better job than their competition.
Yes, the coaches are ridiculously hand-cuffed by replay rules that promote and demand “home field cheating,” but I would still expect a successful leader to find a way to make things better and at least try to get things right more often than not.
Look
you’ve said the same thing about “flow of information” and problem solving and stuff for a while now… GIVE ANSWERS… everyone knows theres flaws in the replay system… tell me what the GREEN BAY PACKERS can do to correct for it… The problem with the system has nothing to do w/ the Packers staff it has to do with the flaw of the system and the home team thing (which I’m pretty sure then NFL realizes and has acknowledged as part of “Home Field”)
Instead of repeating the same thing about there being issues which we all see… make some suggestions since as you put it… You’ve made a lot of money doing that.
by Goldenarmadillo4 on Dec 13, 2010 6:44 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Another deadly cold start on offense. This teams inability to get into a game time flow and rhythm represents serious flaws in preparation and warm up procedures. Just like last week, they looked like the just woke up and got out of bed.
McCarthy? I have been losing confidence.
Rec’d.
Not sure how they’re supposed to do anything different on challenges though.
by packallday555 on Dec 12, 2010 6:23 PM CST up reply actions
jennings was really calling for that one
maybe listen to the players more?
The only glove he needs is a batting glove. - RWShow on Adam Dunn signing.
I didn’t see the play (I was out shoveling the mounds of snow that the snow plow, plowed directly behind my car) but if Jennings was really asking for a challenge, then I don’t see why not.
by packallday555 on Dec 12, 2010 6:34 PM CST up reply actions
Yeah
but pretty much every player thinks they make the play so it’s hard to go on just the player’s word.
I was at the game and the big screen there didn’t show any type of replay until the kickoff… but the NFL does need to find some way to deal w/ this problem… maybe they go to an automatic booth review on EVERY questionable play but still the give the coaches like 1 challenge to give the booth more time or something
by Goldenarmadillo4 on Dec 12, 2010 7:18 PM CST up reply actions
This is what I'd like the NFL to move to
Something more like the college system. I think the NCAA experience should help to get rid of any “it disrupts the flow of the game too much” arguments. They certainly don’t seem to have that problem.
Towlieppan: "You wanna throw high?"
Draft Importance or Free Agency
I believe it might be in Pack’s best interest for next year to get a better back-up to Rodgers. I’m sorry Matt Flynn, but those off passes and couple non-spiral balls don’t add up to NFL caliber. For now i’ll give him the benefit of the doubt being rusty and not getting alot of reps in practice, but please! Make the throws count! No ducks or behind the receiver!
That said, D was tough at times, but not dominant. DOn’t really need dominance when Rodgers is lighting up the scoreboard. Woe is we who lost ot the Lions.
I have reconsidered
this game is a microcosm of what ails Green Bay.
It’s very fan like to blame the coach. But I just cannot shake that the Packers record in close games the last few years has been abysmal.
McCarthy’s abject complete refusal to adapt to context has kept the Packers from winning. He obviously has his positives. But like in any management situation there are guy/gals configured to bring certain things and right now McCarthy is NOT the guy for GB. He’s a builder. But he cannot finish.
See it all the time in corporate America. Ted Thompson must do the right thing and after another lost season explain to Mike that someone else is needed to help the team get to the next level.
2010 is a lost season not due to injury but due to a coach who is off the charts stubborn.
It is legitimately one of the most bizarre things I have ever witnessed as a football fan.
terrible execution
… especially by the Gs/C on offensive line, ok the Lions have a very good D-line, but we got seriously outplayed in the thrences today. Jennings had a terrible drop/tip (that got intercepted) very unlike him.
The defense, played really well again, so this loss had nothing to do with them.
The problem however is deeper than a play here and a play there.
Injuries ? well, we’re surely hurting, but the Lions has as many, if not more key injuries, and they’re not all that good to begin with. Losing Rodgers surely didn’t help, but still.
This game shows clearly why McCarthy should get in the unemployment line with Wade Phillips and Chilly. He clearly has problems getting the players “ready to paly”, he’s a terrible playcaller, the deep pass on 4th&1 was just the iceing on the cake.In the WCO you use your bread&butter, short and intermediate throws to open up the deep shots, not the other way around like McCarthy calls it, and especially when you have trouble protecting your QB, you start w short throws and screen passes (oh, the ones he called worked pretty well).
Rodgers, was a bit indecisive today, and he had a real brainfart when h chose to dive and not slide, and somebody has to force him to wear a mouthpiece, this is his 2nd concussion in about 3 months, this could be a serious problem.
The “no callenge” on the Jennings play, was definatly a good decission not to challenge, the last view before comercials showed the ball clearly hit the ground, it would have been a wastet timeout, good decissions, but still not enough to save his job (IMO)
Oh, and we need a big, powerfull RB!!!! we play in the NFC North, and we will face foul weather several times, the fancy-smancy stuff might work in a dome, or early in the season, but come december and eventually playoffs, you need some big guys to pound the ball, especially when it’s cold and windy.
Face it, even though TT has built a really good defense, he has failed big time in getting Rogders a running game to lean on, and decent protection, doesn’t help one bit to have great recievers when your QB is sacked, this becomes even more of a problem since Rodgers has a tendency to hold the ball too long. Bulaga will eventually be good, but it will take a year or two, and still, we need 4 others on the O-line.
Yeah, I don't think the running backs are the biggest part of the problem
It’s the o-line that’s getting pushed around against even marginal fronts that’s killing it. As far as wanting a “big, powerful RB”, unless you’re talking about a 250 lb guy like Brandon Jacobs or John Clay, the Packers have power running backs (heck, that’s pretty much all we have right now) in Nance, Starks, Kuhn (ugh) and (next year) Grant.
I know we’ll all complain about the 4th and 1 call, but I’m pretty sure there were still short/intermediate routes on that play. Some of that has to be on Flynn not recognizing the situation and just getting the first down.
Towlieppan: "You wanna throw high?"
I didn't get to see the game.
It’s the o-line that’s getting pushed around against even marginal fronts that’s killing it.
How did Clifton and Bulaga do? Was it interior or tackles?
Kylesaurus Rex Williams Pro Bowl 2010
by The Buffalo Kid on Dec 13, 2010 2:05 AM CST up reply actions
It's mostly the left side of the line
I think it’s been said before on here that 3 out of 5 starters on the o-line would (ideally) not be starting next year: Clifton, Colledge, and Wells. Now actually getting acceptable players to replace them, that’s another story.
Towlieppan: "You wanna throw high?"
I can’t say I disagree. I am just done with MM. This was a TERRIBLE game for him and a terrible game for our offense (which he runs). The problem for him is that by having no OC, he has no one to fall back on. The offense is missing a couple pieces (Grant and Finley) but overall hasn’t been as decimated by injures as our D and our D is the unit that is keeping us alive. The team isn’t executing at a very high level
The Green Bay Packers...Putting bad coaches out of their misery since 2010
My feelings as well. Like you said, it’s HIS offense that HE runs. We’ve been so inconsistent on offense, and to me, that’s on McCarthy. The talent is still there for the offense to be good, despite the loss of Finley and Grant. There’s just no excuses.
by packallday555 on Dec 13, 2010 11:03 AM CST up reply actions
I think a lot of our Offensive struggles
go to our line… when our line is playing decent… we dominate… when the line sucks and we have no run game… we suck.
We need to find a way to get the O-line to be consistent… and maybe thats a coaching thing but I’m not sure what MM can do from a coaching standpoint to increase the line productivity (except get rid of the ZBS… which I do blame him for 100%)
by Goldenarmadillo4 on Dec 13, 2010 6:47 PM CST up reply actions
How about nobody?
I can understand Flynn struggling, but for gods sake – the short pass was working the whole time on that final possession. Packers call timeout, and then call a run play that goes nowhere? What the hell was that? If there was any one call on that drive that lost the game, it was that one. The only thing it accomplished was to kill time that the team desperately needed.
The long ball on 4th and 1 was stupid, but we’ve McCarthy pull that crap before. There is a time to be conservative, and a time to chuck it deep.
If there is silver lining to today, it’s the Bears getting blown out in their own type of game. I’m vomiting as I type this, but go Vikings next week.
I agree
if we can’t win one, might as well root for our enemies enemy…
but in any case, my whole opinion of MM has changed after the play calling on that last 4th and 1…
I hope that the pack can fix up their o-line before next week…
by chillier ale on Dec 12, 2010 5:14 PM CST up reply actions
That draw on 2nd down
actually made me avert my eyes from the screen and say “no f’ing way we just ran the ball there.” I just couldn’t believe it. What could the thinking have possibly been there especially coming out of a timeout? If it gets stuffed which of course it was going to then you have to hurry up to snap the inevitable 3rd down because you’re not going to waste 2 to on 1 series there. If MM wanted to run on 2nd down fine but then call the to before 3rd down. Killed the rhythm Flynn had going imo.
If you don't know the cadence of GO PACK GO your opinion doesn't matter
--John Jurkovic
The run play on 2nd down, was classic McCarthy trying to “trick” the opposition. I agree that, that play call was ultimately the one that lost the game. If we just keep on the short passing game, I’m sure we get the 1st down as they were basically giving us the underneath throw.
by packallday555 on Dec 12, 2010 6:28 PM CST up reply actions
RBs and clock management
It’s the o-line that’s getting pushed around against even marginal fronts that’s killing it. As far as wanting a "big, powerful RB", unless you’re talking about a 250 lb guy like Brandon Jacobs or John Clay, the Packers have power running backs (heck, that’s pretty much all we have right now) in Nance, Starks, Kuhn (ugh) and (next year) Grant.
That 250 lbs RB is exactly what I’m talking about, that’s what we need ! (John Clay would be nice..) Kuhn is good for the 1-2 yd plays, but we need that big guy who can pound and drive for 4-5 consistantly. Nance is not there, Grant is good, but still not the right guy for that job, that 250 lbs RB would be a great change-of-pace back combined with Grant.
Yes, the O-line, especially G/C/G got pushed around, and that’s a problem, but haveing a 250 lbs guy who can break of the first tackle will help.
The clock “issue” was not the problem either, they should chew up as much clock as possible, we had the timeouts, and if that 4th&1 was converted, we could have scored, and left the Lions with virtualy no time left.
Well, I'm sure others know, but I'm firmly on the "keep John Clay away from the Packers" bandwagon
for injury reasons and the “Ron Dayne” effect.
Aside from that, I don’t think a 250 lb RB is the answer at all. No big lumbering RB is going to be successful behind the Packers’ current o-line. When defenders are getting into the backfield at the rate that is being allowed, big RBs like that have no time to get going north-south, and they certainly aren’t going to be breaking tackles without that momentum.
I really don’t think that it would be a good change-of-pace back either. Really a “power back” like you’re suggesting would be a slower, slightly stronger version of Grant. If you want a change-of-pace guy, the Packers need a speed back along the lines of a Jamaal Charles or a pre-injury Jerious Norwood.
I’m not really sure what the clock issue you’re talking about is.
Towlieppan: "You wanna throw high?"
Eh, no thanks. Those big backs need some space to work with, and our horrid offensive line can’t give that to a back consistently. If anything, we need a small, quick guy who can make the first guy miss.
I love Clifton but he needs to be replaced after this season, as does Colledge. He just can’t run block at all. He and Colledge next to each other is a recipe for disaster in any running situations. Both rarely get any push, and often times get pushed backwards or just beat. Occasionally the right side of the OL will open up some holes but even when they do, it seems like one of those two is letting their guy through on the back side.
by packallday555 on Dec 12, 2010 6:33 PM CST up reply actions
I agree that our O-line needs a big upgrade too, if you go back and read my entire post, I’m pretty sure I commented on the terrible job by the interior 3, Clifton is getting old too, but he held his ground decently.
I don’t agree with that “small, quick” guy you want, that’s not a very efficient back when the gras at Lambeau gets loose and slippery in the cold.
The best RB combo the Packers have had in recent time, was Green/Davenport, and that’s what we need to get back, Davenport was?? oh, that 250 lbs guy who ran over people, he also had rare speed for his size, true, the O-line was much better then, but like I said, I’m not happy with them either.
I disagree on Clifton. He was absolutely horrible yesterday. He couldn’t contain McBride (who?) or Jackson in pass protection, and he got owned in the running game as well (sometimes not even making contact with his guy). He needs to be replaced asap, and hopefully by Buluga after this season. He’s been so off and on this season. The only problem is, even when he is on, all he’s good for is decent pass protection and pretty much zero run blocking ability.
The main reason I want a guy like that, is because he can make people miss in the back field (which is a must with our OL). If we had a good OL, I’d be fine with getting a bigger back but we don’t. Seems to me the only time those guys succeed is when they have a good OL, who can create some space for them to get going.
I actually think Starks is going to be fine. He’s fast, got good size, and runs hard. The problem is he, like Jackson/Nance/Kuhn, just don’t have anywhere to run the majority of the time.
by packallday555 on Dec 13, 2010 11:10 AM CST up reply actions
Packers on drugs?
It’s gonna take years to get the stank out of Ford field. Lots of people talking we just have to win against NYG and Bears to get in the playoffs. I’ve said over and over again that what’s the point to get into the playoffs only to go OAD like last yr.? This team isn’t going anywhere in the playoffs. Some may think lightning in a bottle. Yeah, right. Dream on. Beat NYG and Bears? Hell, we can’t beat the Lions and their 3rd string qb. I blame this loss on EVERYONE on the team, including the D. Yeah, they played a great game, right up until crunch time. How many games have we lost in the 4th qtr. after leading or tying, only to see the D give up the big score? They play great for 30 mins. then fold.
I don't care how whiny it sounds.
You can pin Rodgers getting hurt, and by extension, our best chance of winning, directly on a repeated lack of competent refereeing. The refs have proven that they’re not going to call the calls the same for every QB. You’ve got the Brady/Manning rules, and then you’ve got everyone else.
If the refs had proven that they’re going to be serious and protect the QB from cheap shots like Rodgers had been taking all season on slides, then he probably slides instead of getting concussed. But they haven’t once called any sort of penalty on any defender hitting Rodgers late (especially in the case of his sliding), which is why he didn’t slide when he got rocked.
Wow
That is one of the worst arguments I’ve ever seen. You are going to suggest that because Rodgers figured he was going to get hit anyways he launched himself headlong into defenders to place himself into additional danger? No, that is not the reason he didn’t slide. He didn’t slide because he was trying to pick up additional yards for an offense that was struggling.
Towlieppan: "You wanna throw high?"
by GoGregGo on Dec 12, 2010 9:02 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
This is garbage
Losers whine about officiating. We are better than that, and besides, the referees did just fine this game. Save this argument when you might actually have an argument, and even then, don’t make it. That’s what Viking fans do.
by ktenreb on Dec 13, 2010 7:52 AM CST up reply actions 2 recs
God forbid someone be allowed to vent.
And god forbid someone point out that the refs this season are beyond useless. But complain once, and everyone thinks you’re stupid, etc. At least I’m not like the idiots who cheer against the team just because they don’t like the coach/GM/whatever (and yes, there are idiots like that out there.)
by AquaBreaker on Dec 13, 2010 10:50 AM CST up reply actions
I agree with your statement that the refs haven’t been great this season but by no means was that a penalty on that Rodgers hit. That was all on him. He should have slid. Period. I get that he likes to show his toughness (I always hated and rarely listened to my coach to tell me to slide or run out of bounds. Qb’s are football players too, aren’t they?), but he also has to realize that he is the team. Without him, we’re going to struggle big time to win.
by packallday555 on Dec 13, 2010 11:12 AM CST up reply actions
eh…I am with ktenreb…shockingly. :-) The officiating was fine. Our team SUCKED. I refuse to put ANYTHING on the refs when our team executed THIS poorly. Our gameplanning was off, our QB was off, our #1 WR was off, our Oline was off. This entire team (offensively) sucked…officiating had nothing to do with it.
The Green Bay Packers...Putting bad coaches out of their misery since 2010
That happened once before
You agreed with me one other time, but then I called you a “numb nuts” or something and things went back to the way they should be.
I was impolite to AquaBreaker and I apologize for the tone or my remark, but it drives me nuts when people whine about referees. In this game, the refs did nothing wrong. The Packers plain sucked offensively. Teams with class don’t whine about referees; Vikings fans do that.
I didn't think you were all that impolite
We directed the exact same remarks towards Vikings fans after the game at Lambeau, and they had more of a gripe there than we ever could with this past weekend.
Fair enough.
Sunday was just one of those games that sucked, plain and simple, and I fired off a bad remark. Let’s leave it there and just focus on what’s ahead.
I thought it was a bit curious myself.
Granted, the hit was 100% legal, but we did see Suh get flagged for tackling Cutler last week. Flags have been thrown on much lesser hits than that.
Refs
the hit on Rodgers was 100% legal, nothing wrong with that, had Rodgers slid instead of going head first, it would have been illegal, and most likely flagged.
Compared to the hit Suh had on Cutler last week, they are not very compatable. Suh did a huge misstake by extending his arms when he hit, and that’s probably why it was flagged, had he done a normal tackle, he would not be flagged, and he would most likely have landed on top of Cutler, which would have been much more punishing to Cutler, if that was Suh’s intent.
The flag however was a bad call by Hochuli, Hochuli has really lost his judgement in recent years, he still knows the rulebook word-by-word, and he has the mouth of a slick lawyer, so he can “explain” his way out of a bad call, but he has lost his good judgement and ability to apply the rules in practice, it might be time for him to consider retirement from the NFL.
Teams That Lose to the Detroit Lions
Are not playoff teams.
Unless they’re in the NFC West.
"Show me a good loser, and I'll show you a loser." - Vince Lombardi
The play didn't merit a flag
The offense took another 4 quarters off, this time in one game and in a row. The game was called fairly IMHO. This loss was well deserved.
by Danwood on Dec 12, 2010 8:06 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
MM's play calling
I really like MM as a head coach, and is great at developing young guys on offense, but he seriously needs to step down as the play caller on offense. His no commitment to the run game has lost us yet another game. With the great defense that we have, we should be pounding the rock, when we have a lead no matter how ineffective it may be. But MM never even thinks about it n keeps calling pass plays with a backup QB n leaves the defense on the field way too much n often. It doesn’t matter how great a defense is, when they are put on the field over n over again, they are eventually gonna allow a TD, which happened today, n in that Washington game.
I would like to see Joe Philbin, given at least a chance, to prove if he can be a better play caller than McCarthy.
I think in this case
he was right to abandon the run… he tried to show some dedication to the run in the first half and it was doing nothing at all (more on the O-line then anything)
Aaron Rodgers was the leading rusher for the team and he played less then 1/2 the game… outside of him we ran the ball 18 times (15 if you take Flynn’s runs out) for 41 yards (31 minus Flynns 10) for an average of 2.3 yards per carry (2.1 without Flynn).
I understand wanting to run the ball and using the run to set up the pass… but he tried to do that in the first half and it was giving a ton of 2nd and 10+ or 3 and 8+ and we can’t win games like that… He tried, but at some point you have to admit that trying to the run ball with numbers like that is like beating a dead horse and you have to give it up :-/
by Goldenarmadillo4 on Dec 13, 2010 12:28 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
I like McCarthy
but not his run calls. Sure, the O line doesn’t kick ass at run blocking, the backs aren’t spectacular. I just think when you’re getting penetration into the backfield it is very dangerous to run sweeps and delays that can lose you yards if you don’t execute. I think if the run game is struggling, just run the dive when you run so you at least move forward…now obviously you can’t just do that all the time either cuz teams will key off on it, but I only want to see 1 draw and 1 sweep per game, unless they are killing it. The less you use those plays, the more effective they will be.
0, 1, 3 and 5 gaps
This game showed exactly what is wrong with the Packers’ offensive line. There was absolutely no control of the middle and left-side gaps. Wells, again, showed that he just isn’t an NFL starting-caliber center, and if anybody played worse than him, it had to be the three-headed failure at LG. While he played better than Wells, Clifton also had an especially bad game, Now, throw in the less-than-mediocre running backs and you can see that the Packers simply aren’t going anywhere, even if they should slip into the playoffs.
+1
That left side is downright abysmal. Lions players were tearing through those gaps ALL game long. I swear I saw Clifton just completely whiff on his guy a couple times, which ultimately killed basically any and ever stretch play to the right side. Totally agreed on Wells too. He’s just to small. He’s tenacious in there but he just can’t compete with the big boys.
The interior of this line needs to get fixed if we ever plan on actually winning some playoff games.
by packallday555 on Dec 13, 2010 11:16 AM CST up reply actions
What's the story with Spitz?
I liked him better at center than Wells, but it seems like he just isn’t the same since his injury. Is it mental, or physical? I think he’s a better guard than Colledge (at least I used to think so), but yesterday he didn’t have it.
Before jesterday, I really thought that Spitz should start at center, with Colledge/Lange duking it out for LG. Now I don’t know. I’m certain that Wells can’t be there next year, but if Spitz lost his confidence, I don’t know what else we can do this year.
Seems like he’s just not the same as before his injury. Otherwise, one would have to think that he’d be in there in place of either Wells or Colledge. As he was better than both last season and the year before that in my opinion.
Whatever it is that has effected him (physical or mental), it’s alarming. I think we’ve gotta replace at least two of the three between Clifton, Colledge, and Wells this next season if we want to have even a decent running game but that’s not going to be easy to do. In order to do so, Thompson would probably have to sign a quality FA, which is well..I’m just going to leave it at that.
by packallday555 on Dec 13, 2010 5:01 PM CST up reply actions
I'd like to try mixing the line up for the last few games
I know it won’t happen… but I’d like to see what some of these younger/unknown guys can do… especially against a pass rush like Chicago.
I think right now before the draft/trades/anything… our line next year looks like
LT – Bulaga
LG – ??? (This is the one line position I don’t think we have a good setup for)
C – Spitz
RG – Sitton
RT – Lang
I’d like to see what this group could do the rest of the year… maybe push Spitz to LG and keep Wells at Center for the remainder of this year… but I honestly feel like that’s going to be our line going into next year
by Goldenarmadillo4 on Dec 13, 2010 6:52 PM CST up reply actions

by 




















