Baranczyk Tells It Like It Is
By PackerAaron
From his breakdown of the Panther game:
You want one word to describe the Packers: Finesse. They like to pretend that they’re a power football team with their inverted wishbone and power-I formations. But they aren’t a power football team and I don’t think they have it between their legs to be one.Power football teams have good special teams. They get downfield and tackle people. They have players on defense who like to tackle and are looking for collisions. Offensively, they can punch it into the end zone from a yard or two out. That was Carolina . You saw none of that from the Packers.
PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHEESEHEAD NATION WEEKLY NEWSLETTER HERE.
__________________________
Comments (12)
December 02, 2008 at 02:24 pm
Finesse? Why give them that much credit? They're soft. And they have been since week one. MM needs to realize what his offense is and what it's strengths are and TT needs to do everything in his ability in the off-season to make that defense better. No one on that side of the ball should be safe.
December 02, 2008 at 03:19 pm
Haven't we seen this before? They can't fricken' tackle. Haven't been able to since Holmgren left.
My comment all over ye olde blogosphere...They really need some fiery leadership. They lack passion.
December 02, 2008 at 03:54 pm
They need better players.
Winning football players are hard nosed football players. Maybe skill guys can get away with it, but usually you need to be pretty darn skilled to get away with it (see: Sanders, Deion.) Otherwise, winning football is played by guys who will mix things up in the trenches and hit.
So to me, this whole finesse vs. toughness debate is missing the point. Our players, notably our lines and linebackers, just aren't that good.
December 02, 2008 at 04:33 pm
Actually, you look at the Packers in short yardage this season, they actually can get the tough yards. This area of the offense is markedly improved over previous seasons. (And it ain't even close). I hate it when someone takes a subset of 1 and then tries to extrapolate some greater trend.
What do you call a fullback dive other than smashmouth football? That's exactly why I like it.
Now, the arguments about hitting and tackling are legit....
PackerAaron
December 02, 2008 at 04:47 pm
DDD - There's a difference between getting one yard on the 40 yard line and getting one yard at the goalline. The plays that have worked on the goalline are the QB sneak and the playaction pass. And yes - the FB dive worked once out of the three times McCarthy has called it.
December 02, 2008 at 04:54 pm
You really think 4th and 1 at the 40 is *that* much different short yardage at the goal line?
In any event, the **Packers couldn't even convert 3rd and short anywhere on the field the last few years.** This season, the Packers are pretty automatic in short yardage. It makes no sense to me to single out one of the few areas on the team that has unquestionably improved.
PackerAaron
December 02, 2008 at 05:01 pm
There's a massive difference. The possibility for a deep pass is completely eliminated for starters. You know this...
December 02, 2008 at 05:25 pm
Fourth and short situations are pretty damn close to goal line situations. Who cares whether the deep pass is some theorical possibility. Playaction at the goal line is also a possibility? Does it really matter if the DB's are 15 yards away from the ball carrier versus 30 yards? They aren't in position to make the tackle anyhow. Not buying the "deep pass" theory.
PackerAaron
December 02, 2008 at 08:55 pm
"Who cares whether the deep pass is some theorical (we know what you mean ;) ) possibility" - Really? Ever notice how those 3rd down conversions started happening after the 3rd & 1 bomb went to Driver for a touchdown against Atlanta? Don't you think defensive coordinators took note of that? Stats and trends are fine, but there's a context they have to be put in. Furthermore, you keep bringing up this short yardage issue - yes, they have improved over last year, but the whole argument started because of the goalline carries against Carolina. In this area, the goalline, they have NOT improved since last year - they've gotten worse. How many rushing TDs does Grant have this year? How many does Jackson have? Isn't it telling that Rodgers has more than both of them? You can spin it with stats all you want - McCarthy took the ball out of Rodgers hands at the goalline because he was coaching scared. That is playing not-to-lose. And when you do that, you usually lose.
December 02, 2008 at 09:28 pm
Totally disagree that it was playing scared. Totally. I have some things to say on that topic in a future post.
In the meantime, check out my blog if you are interested in the Willaims' legal hail mary.
December 02, 2008 at 09:31 pm
So because our special teams sucks(and they do), we can never be a power football team? Do our offensive linemen, running backs, starting defenders play special teams?
This is stupid.
PackerAaron
December 02, 2008 at 09:37 pm
Actually, there are plenty of starters on teams. And where does he (or I for that matter) say that the special teams are the CAUSE of the lack of physical play? He (and I!) are saying the horrible special teams play is an aftereffect of having a finesse team. Your special teams are almost always populated by backup linebackers, a smattering of linemen and defensive backs. The guys on teams right now are not getting off blocks and are not tackling worth a damn. That's indicative of the entire team. There's nothing 'stupid' about it, actually.