Packers Daily Links: Not In Panic Mode
Head coach Mike McCarthy touched on several subjects in his day-after press conference following the loss to the Chicago Bears...
In an attempt to sum up head coach Mike McCarthy's day-after press conference following the Monday Night Football loss to the Chicago Bears, Jason Wilde of ESPNMilwaukee writes, "McCarthy’s team might have suffered a disappointing nationally televised loss on Monday night to the NFC North rival Chicago Bears, but the Green Bay Packers coach was in anything but panic mode one day later." What is meant by that should become clear as we get through the rest of the today's links.
McCarthy indicated confidence in the running game. "I like our running backs. We are going to use them accordingly to get the ball down the field. I'm not trying to sell something that is not true," McCarthy is quoted as saying by Lori Nickel of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. "Just because you don't line up and run it 25 times from the 'I' doesn't mean you are not committed to being productive with your running backs. If you look at the dynamics of our offensive personnel, we have the ability to play in a box offense. We have the ability to play in a spread offense. That is to our credit, and we're going to utilize that the best we can." To be fair, the Bears are really, really good against the run. And by good, they might be the best in the NFL at stuffing the run.
The veteran offensive tackles are showing signs of age says Rob Demovsky of the Green Bay Press-Gazette. "[Quarterback Aaron] Rodgers wasn’t sacked and took only three hits, but he was flushed out of the pocket on several occasions," writes Demovsky. "The two tackles also had three penalties each – two false starts and an illegal formation on Clifton, and two false starts and a costly holding that wiped out a touchdown on Tauscher." McCarthy, predictably, expressed his faith in his tackles and the sentiment is that they'll continue to start as long as they're healthy. Jim Polzin of the Wisconsin State Journal penned a similar article.
The post-game incident between safety Nick Collins and a Chicago Bears fan is under review by the NFL, but McCarthy said yesterday that he's got Collins' back. ”I support Nick 100%,” McCarthy is quoted as saying by Mike Vandermause of the Press-Gazette.
Max Ginsberg of the blog Purple Pants, Green Jersey thinks Collins will endure a fine by the NFL. "The league is currently looking into the situation and will likely fine Collins this week," writes Ginsberg. "Last week, Brandon Jacobs was fined $10,000 for throwing his helmet into the crowd, although it appeared to be an accident. Collins, on the other hand, deliberately threw his mouthguard at the fan. Regardless of intention, I would guess Collins’ fine will be similar to Jacobs’. It is possible that commissioner Roger Goodell will hand down a more severe penalty, but given the fan’s alleged behavior, that decision would not sit well with many fans or players." The logic makes sense, and so does a fine compared to a suspension, which would seem extreme.
The poor special teams effort from Monday is examined a little more in-depth by Mike Spofford of the Packers official website who asks if the Packers will bounce back or regress. "It’s up to the players to determine that, beginning this week," writes Spofford at Packers.com. "McCarthy said the onus is on the coaching staff to navigate the team’s injury situation better and make sure the players who are going to be on the special teams units during the game are the ones taking the snaps in practice." I'm not sure how the coaching staff plans to "navigate" the injury situation better, but whatever works.
Asking for a little serenity following the Packers loss is Al Davis of Packernet. "McCarthy was as pissed as I have ever seen on the sideline," writes Davis. "I thought he was more hard-nosed in training camp than previously and more impatient with mistakes, so he must be boiling after watching the film of his team play like a bunch of pee-wees grabbing face-masks, false starting and committing personal fouls on back-to-back plays. I believe the message will be sent loud and clear. A loss next week and, well, I can’t even go there."
Paul Noonan of Brewed Sports is mad at Mike McCarthy for not allowing the Bears to score at the end of the game. "So you never considered letting the Bears score?" asks Noonan. "With under 2 minutes to play and only 1 timeout? That makes you an idiot." Actually, McCarthy did consider it. He said he even talked with Dom Capers about it. He just chose not to do it.
Green Bay Packer Nation says there's plenty of season left.
The folks at Packer Forum are considering Ahman Green.
The Seattle Seahawks signed both Breno Giacomini and Allen Barbre.
Pete Dougherty of the Press-Gazette provides a scouting report on the Detroit Lions.




Comments (47)
September 29, 2010 at 08:51 am
To be fair, the folks at Packer Forum are considering any running back with any kind of name recognition, so long as they aren't on our roster.
September 29, 2010 at 09:05 am
Personally I could not care less if we bring a back in that I've ever heard of as long as he makes the D respect our ground game. Fact of the matter is we don't currently have a back that demands that recognition. To be fair.
Are you content with our ground game Chris? Do you feel comfortable that we can lean on our ground game when the weather turns if we 'NEED' to? Didn't think so.
Find another diamond in the rough Ala Grant for all I care. But the fact of the matter is a lot of 'experts' think Lynch can be had for the right price, and I think he's the kind of RB we need.
GBP 4 LIFE
September 29, 2010 at 09:25 am
Yes, I'm content. The Colts had the leagues worst rushing last season. Where'd they go? Oh yeah, the Super Bowl.
The year before that, the Cardinals and Steelers were ranked #32 and 23 in rushing, respectively. Oh yeah, both teams went to the Super Bowl. Oh, and the Steelers play in ever bit of bad weather as we do, so the "December" argument as it relates to rushing is flawed.
Aaron showed why our running game works. No, we're not getting 10 yards a carry, but our run game is good enough to set up play action on a consistent basis. In that light, I'd argue that other teams *are* respecting our running game.
You suggested a diamond in the rough- How do we know neither Nance nor Starks aren't?
Oh that's right. It's all about instant results. We have three more games before the trade deadline. Let's see where we sit then, hmm?
Brian Carriveau
September 29, 2010 at 09:28 am
You're right, Chris, in that the cold weather argument is inaccurate. Cold weather doesn't stop anyone from passing. Only very wet, sloppy weather does.
September 29, 2010 at 10:27 am
So if we're hosting the NFCC and the field is wet and/or sloppy... what then Brian? What if it's an unseasonably warm 38 degree day and it's spittin' cold rain on us and the field is garbage? We just gonna 'hope' the weather is favorable that day? Or, lemme guess, you'll be fine with Jackson or Kuhn... Laughable. You're smarter than that.
September 29, 2010 at 10:39 am
My apologies Batman.
What is overpaying?
To me, a RB in the hand is better than a 3rd rounder in the bush. Especially when said RB might put you over the top.
PackerAaron
September 29, 2010 at 10:48 am
It's Space Ghost. Get it right.
PackerAaron
September 29, 2010 at 09:29 am
Exactly. Everyone likes to make it out as some harbinger of doom. It's a passing league now. Look at the Steelers' last SB victory. They were ONE of the worst rushing teams in the league. The worst? The team they beat: The Cardinals.
September 29, 2010 at 10:31 am
They had THE best D in the league. THE best. By far. A dominant defense can make up for an unbalanced offense. Now PLEASE tell me our current D is in the same category as THAT D was. Please. Apples to Oranges.
September 29, 2010 at 11:06 am
"It’s Space Ghost. Get it right."
Brian, Aaron, I just want you to know I punched myself in the face and cut off my big toe. I knew that wasn't Batman, yet I couldn't quite place the picture. My bad.
Anyhew, you guys are probably right, but I'm a stubborn SOB.
I'm going to bed. F off. :-)
GBP 4 LIFE
September 29, 2010 at 10:23 am
"The Colts had the leagues worst rushing last season. Where’d they go? Oh yeah, the Super Bowl."
And lost.
"The year before that, the Cardinals and Steelers were ranked #32 and 23 in rushing, respectively. Oh yeah, both teams went to the Super Bowl."
The team with the better run game won.
Thank you for helping my stance.
Brian Carriveau
September 29, 2010 at 10:33 am
I don't exactly appreciate being told I'm "smarter than that," Fitzcore. All I said is that cold weather doesn't stop passing games.
I fully realize that if weather is wet and sloppy, teams need to run the ball. As of right now I'm content with Jackson and Kuhn. I think a Marshawn Lynch could be a good addition, but I also don't think overpaying to get a guy like him is a good idea either.
Brian Carriveau
September 29, 2010 at 10:56 am
Beginning to agree w/ draft pick. Just don't want to part w/ Hawk or Lang or depth.
Brian Carriveau
September 29, 2010 at 11:16 am
Don't worry, we still love you Fitz.
September 29, 2010 at 09:27 am
Do they need a better run game? Yes, I'm in full agreement.
Did the 'D' not respect the Packers run game? Disagree. The Bears totally sold out against the run, 1/3rd of Rodgers passing yardage came off of play-action. Bears overplayed it every time but once, and that was a jail-break allowed by Clifton and Tauscher.
September 29, 2010 at 10:36 am
"Did the ‘D’ not respect the Packers run game? Disagree. The Bears totally sold out against the run"
I'm not referring to the bears, I'm talking big-picture, long term. You can rest assured if we keep rushing like we have of late, teams will not bite on those play-actions or feel the need to stack the box. And that is a fact.
September 29, 2010 at 10:47 am
And if they stop stacking the box and biting on play-action then the running lanes open up. I'll stop short of saying, 'that is a fact', tends to really limit the discussion.
September 29, 2010 at 11:00 am
CSS,
Are you telling me that if Defenses continue to see zero running threat from us they will feel a need to stack 8 in the box?
I say they won't. I say "that's a fact", not to be condescending in any way. But that's the kind of stuff that gets DC's shit-canned. DC's aren't going to game-plan for something unless you give them a reason too. We've got away with it through 3 weeks but unless we show a reason soon, nobody's going to pay our ground game any attention. And that will only exemplify any deficiency's we may have on the O-line, thus hindering the passing game.
Sorry if that "really limits the discussion", but it should. Thems the facts.
Out.
September 29, 2010 at 11:14 am
Not what I said at all. I agreed with you that there are issues with the run game. Personally, much of it resides with the OL.
I said the Bears, even the Bills, sold out to limit/stop what they knew was a weak Packer running game to force a one-dimensional approach by the Packers. Consequently, Rodgers threw for a ton of yardage on play-action. I would be willing to be his completion percentage and YPA are higher from under center on play action compared to shotgun.
Hard to make an All Pro QB that makes limited bad decisions pay for being one-dimensional. Play action will continue to work. As soon as teams disrespect it and push straight up field and/or stop stacking the box you will see running lanes open up.
Through 3 games, I personally place more of the blame on two bookends that were never known for run-blocking in their prime, let alone their twilight years and an inconsistant LG in Colledge that loses at the POA and can't get to the 2nd level.
To this point, I don't know there is a big picture. We're through 10 quarters of play without Grant and each respective defense has stacked the line against our below averge run blocking O-line in each of those respective quarters.
September 29, 2010 at 09:45 am
Wait so fans are criticizing and crucifying the tackles as horrible run blockers (rightly so). We also have a left guard who can't run block on a consistent basis. Yet you want them to get a back that can still put up decent numbers behind that? Where are we going to get this magical player? What you think were gonna get another Ryan Grant? Sure and I am going to win a $150 million powerball jackpot, not once but twice.
And what team that has some good backs is going to trade their depth away? Running backs dont exactly play a cushy position like punter where injuries are rare. RBs get hurt, at some point in the season every RB is gonna run into some knicks and bruises that limit their effectiveness. I dont see a team trading away their RB depth unless they fleece the Packers, and I am guessing that would mean draft picks. And while yes I would love to win now I dont want to sacrifice the next few years. We have a team that potentially could compete for a super bowl every year for the next 5 or 6 years. Yet we still have positions that will need to be filled or restocked. You know MM is not gonna fill those needs through FA, so I say keep the draft picks. Give Nance a try, I honestly dont even remember him getting a try against Chicago (was he even active?).
Brian Carriveau
September 29, 2010 at 09:53 am
Nope, Nance was not active, MCel0001.
September 29, 2010 at 10:04 am
I can't stand the "don't want to mortgage the future" argument. Who the hell knows what's gong to happen next year or 5 years from now? What we DO know is that THIS team could be a contender with a move made THIS YEAR (no - I don't think they are right now).
I get that you want to save/accumulate draft picks when you're "rebuilding". But when do you decide that you're close enough to just "go for it". It seems to me that they are that close right now.
But I'm just an emotional fan I guess.
September 29, 2010 at 10:49 am
"I can’t stand the “don’t want to mortgage the future” argument. Who the hell knows what’s gong to happen next year or 5 years from now? What we DO know is that THIS team could be a contender with a move made THIS YEAR"
Yep. May not even be football next year.
"But I’m just an emotional fan I guess"
Guess that makes two of us. And I'm fine with it.
September 29, 2010 at 08:56 am
"The Seattle Seahawks signed both Breno Giacomini and Allen Barbre."
I know nothing about fantasy football (don't have that gene) but anyone who has Hassleback should dump him immediately.
Also hope MM grows a pair and makes a statement by sitting someone for their perfomance (a lineman maybe...replaced by a promising rookie 1st rounder).
September 29, 2010 at 10:14 am
Im not sure where Barbre is but the Seahawks signed Giacomini and Dietrich-Smith.
Brian Carriveau
September 29, 2010 at 10:27 am
The Seahawks signed Dietrich-Smith before Week 1, PackerT. They just announced the signings of Barbre and Giacomini yesterday.
September 29, 2010 at 08:58 am
"So you never considered letting the Bears score?"
If you're gonna get after Coach, at least know what your spouting off about. As Brian said, it was considered, he went the other way. Kudos Coach.
As far as RB's go, I've seen enough. I was on board thinking Jackson and Kuhn would suffice as 'complimentary' pieces to our high flying aerial attack. After roughly 10 quarters post-Grant, I firmly believe they won't suffice come winter, we need help. Ted, I like the way you go about your business but this is the time to cough up a 2nd or a 3rd and bring in Marshawn Lynch. Nobody is going to respect our run game with the backs we have, and that will let them focus on the pass. We need a back that defenses have to account for, that back is not on our 53. PERIOD.
GBP 4 LIFE
September 29, 2010 at 09:34 am
I think we need our offensive line to improve if we want our running game to improve. Until that happens, we're going to continue to struggle, constantly.
September 29, 2010 at 09:38 am
As long as Tauscher and Clifton are your bookends and Colledge struggles at the POA and getting to the 2nd level, you will not see the improvement come from the line. Bulaga and Lang are instant upgrades in the run game, but I get the impression the coaching staff are sitting on both knowing it's a 16 game season plus the playoffs.
Unless McCarthy can get creative with his schemes I don't see the line itself improving in that department.
I would be curious what Rodgers YPA are from shotgun vs. under center. Reason I ask: I would like to see how effective play action is and how much the opposition is selling out to stop any Packers running.
Brian? Aaron? Any breakdown out there?
Brian Carriveau
September 29, 2010 at 09:53 am
Interesting thought, CSS. I don't know of any breakdowns out there like that. Maybe send a note to Football Outsiders. That's something up their alley.
September 29, 2010 at 11:48 am
Completely agree. I don't think the RBs are doing the job, but which ones would with this kind of performance by the OL????
September 29, 2010 at 01:39 pm
I think our OL coach needs to be fired!!! Look what happened last year we had a capable RT on the team in TJ Lang and they never gave him a shot at the job. Now Cliffy and Taush both suck bad and won't pull them!!!! Arod looked scared on monday night and he should be. Flashbacks from last year. The time is now for the Bulaga and Lang era!!!
September 29, 2010 at 09:34 am
I think we need our offensive line to improve if we want our running game to improve. Until that happens, we're going to continue to struggle.
September 29, 2010 at 09:35 am
Im tired of our poor running game already. I sure miss Grant, week 6 is a long way away but i really want to see what Starks can do if he can stay healthy. I am worried about our tackles too it might be time for Bulaga and Lang
September 29, 2010 at 09:53 am
I really dont get why every one is harping on the running game. Did any one watch the game? Did any one see the last Packers drive? Did you see the close up of Urlachers face when he saw the Packers go back to 5 wide the play before JJs fumble? It was the look of a defeated man, you could almost read his lips. His body language and facial expression were like "Oh jeez not again." I can tell you that body language had nothing to do with how bad or good our running game was. It had everything to do with their inability to stop Rodgers and the short - medium passing game. He knew it, every one in the stadium knew it, and every one watching on TV knew it. JJ doesnt fumble and Rodgers marches them down for a TD, running game or lack there of be damned.
Also I would be a lot harsher on the running game if they actually tried running more often. But I dont blame the coaching staff for not running more last game. The short passing game was working, I say keep doing it till they stop you. The bears never did stop them, stupid penalties did.
September 29, 2010 at 10:12 am
Right - Urlacher was scared/defeated... got it.
And yeah - they bares were obviously outmatched when it came to defending the pass - that's why the Packers scored a whopping 17 friggin' points.
That is how the bares play - they give you the underneath stuff - when you catch it they hit you and try to take the bal awayl. they will not allow you to get deep - they trust that your team will make a mistake before their team does. THIS METHOD HAS BEEN WORKING AGAINST THE PACKERS FOR A LONG TIME! That's why the day after a Pack/bares game (win or lose) you're always thinking about how ugly the game was.
The bares try to muck everything up... and it works.
September 29, 2010 at 11:49 am
Well put. That is exactly what they do. And that's exactly why it was especially brutal to keep getting backed up 5-10 yards. Rodgers was all over the short stuff, but it doesn't leave any room for error when you're going 20 yards for a first down.
We played right into their hands on this. Dammit. This one keeps smarting.
September 29, 2010 at 11:50 am
BS. They didn't get completely gashed because of the stupid penalties.
They were getting completely killed by Rodgers and CO, no other way to look at it.
"They give the underneat stuff". Clearly you didn't watch Finley over and over getting 15+ yards over the middle...
September 29, 2010 at 05:21 pm
We had two very long scoring drives killed by penalties. One of those led to a FG, the other one led to a blocked FG try. We don't shoot ourselves in the foot and we probably hang 28 on them.
September 29, 2010 at 09:55 am
How Jackson goes from our third down back to our starting back not in on third downs is one mystery. How Kuhn goes from two carries at fullback to 10 at "featured" halfback is odd. And don't blame Brandon for being a bit slow of foot and large. Packers turned him into another fullback, required to block defensive tackles and ends.
September 29, 2010 at 09:58 am
FOrgot to post this. Jackson at Nebraska four short years ago:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7LqfRdnT0I
September 29, 2010 at 11:19 am
Chris Mortenson saying in his chat today that the Bills are asking for a staring O-lineman and a high draft pick for Lynch, supposedly a 2nd. That's a lot, even as a starting point in negotiations.
September 30, 2010 at 05:44 am
That is pretty steep.
September 29, 2010 at 11:23 am
I like the fact that McCarthy was never too afraid to run the ball at Chicago. And he actual came up with some nice plays to open up a running lane for the backs to maneuver through. I'm not wise enough in the football realm to know how that influenced the Bears defense, but I'd be willing to bet it made some impact in keeping them honest.
After all, what he said makes sense. If you're going to run the ball as much as you pass it against a stout run defense like the Bears, then you're just setting yourself up for failure. You can't give up entirely, but there's adjustments that need to happen with the ratio of run to pass plays.
Really, if you look at Chicago's stats from the game, they also ran less than 100 total yards.
September 29, 2010 at 12:09 pm
is d'angelo williams going to be a packer???
http://joeslockerroom.com/On_The_Sidelines.html
September 29, 2010 at 05:26 pm
Doubt it, but I would take him over Lynch any day and twice on Sunday.
September 30, 2010 at 05:50 am
James Jones and a 4th in a heartbeat.