Packers Running Game: Real or Mirage?
The pundit class has proclaimed instant balance for the Packers offense. That is not quite the case.
By PackerAaron
Good note from Rob Demovsky yesterday:
McCarthy ditched the three-receiver spread, which he used on four of the first six snaps, and resurrected the old three-back attack.
With rookie James Starks in the backfield behind the fullback duo of Quinn Johnson and John Kuhn, Starks ripped off a 27-yard gain the first time he touched the ball.
Lo and behold, McCarthy stuck with it. Starks got the ball on three of the next four plays, and he was on his way to a monster game. Starks carried 23 times for 123 yards (a 5.3-yard average).
...the three-back set seemed most effective. (McCarthy) went back to that in the second quarter on consecutive plays to open a drive, and Starks ran for 5 and 4 yards to set up a third-and-1 conversion by Kuhn (who actually fumbled on the play but recovered). Starks might have ripped off another long run, possibly a touchdown, later in that drive, but he stumbled through a big hole at the Eagles’ 28-yard line after gaining 6 yards.
Starks’ production combined with McCarthy’s willingness to stick with the run yielded an attack that featured 32 rushing plays and 29 passing plays (27 attempts plus two sacks).
All season long, McCarthy has talked about the number of attempts the running backs were getting needing to go up. Finally we saw him put his money where his mouth is. Of course, it helped that he had a back breaking off large chunks of yardage in the first quarter.
As Rob points out, it also helped that the Packers went back to the "Falcon" and ""Rhino" (names McCarthy gave the formations in 2007) sets as extensively as they did. It was by far the most liberal use of the three back set as we've seen all year.
However, its interesting to note that the Packers had similar success out of those formations the last time they played the undersized defensive front of the Eagles. (Indeed, the play where Ryan Grant got hurt after ripping off a big run was nearly identical to Starks' first play where he ripped off a big run.)
On Saturday night, the Packers are heading into a venue where their offensive line was humiliated against a team that completely manhandled every aspect of their running game.
An early recurring theme from people paid to talk and write about football is that the Packers somehow instantly have balance - just add James Starks! - after Sunday's game against the Eagles. That is not quite the case. The guys up front, including the fullbacks and tight ends, will need to do a much better job than they did the last time they played in Atlanta, or you can count on McCarthy going back to his spread formations and letting Aaron Rodgers go no-huddle up and down the field.
PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHEESEHEAD NATION WEEKLY NEWSLETTER HERE.
__________________________
Comments (24)
January 11, 2011 at 01:57 am
Great analysis.
January 11, 2011 at 03:29 am
100% spot on with this. Lets hope we come out with some big runs to start the game. Atlanta now having to prep for a possible running threat alone helps us tremendously. One thing to be said about all the injuries is that we can't be an easy team to game plan for when you never know who is going to be on the field.
January 11, 2011 at 06:44 am
They have just enough rushing O to keep the other team honest in this game. But not only do the blockers need to step up, so do the recievers, so when the passing lanes open up it can be taken advantage of without drops and fumbles.
January 11, 2011 at 07:12 am
AR completed nearly 75% (26 of 35) of his passes for 344 yards against Atlanta, game 1 ...... Even with an anemic running game, GB outgained Atlanta by 418 yards to 294 yards ..... The difference in the game was the fumble by AR .....
There is no margin for error against Atlanta ..... No turnovers, slightly improved running game & minimal penalties & GB goes to Chicago ......
January 11, 2011 at 08:23 am
Or Seattle. :/
January 11, 2011 at 08:44 am
Seattle...nah.
My dream since the playoffs started was I want us to beat the Bears. We go to the Super Bowl which is great on it's own.
It also let's me have fun w/ Bear fans (I live in Chicago). Up until we play them in the fall I can remind them we're 2-0 vs the Bears in 2011. And Lovie Smith said at his first press conference his goal would be to beat the Packers. His record would now be 8-7; 0-1 in the playoffs. "Hey Lovie, how's that working for you!!"
January 11, 2011 at 08:28 am
Yes, the offense had all those stats AND yet they only managed 17 points from them. Granted AR's fumble cost us 7 more.
A successful use of the 3 back set would force 8 men in the box opening up the passing game so AR wouldn't have to dink and dunk his way down the field.
The spread dink and dunk plays into the hands of the Falcons. We become one dimensional, the Falcons can play to their comfort of 7 in the box, and it keeps the game "manageable" which is where they like it.
January 11, 2011 at 12:51 pm
I don't put that game on ARodg's fumble; the idiot that called for, not one, but TWO quarterback sneaks; when the qb IS the offense, AND can run a pretty mean bootleg, IS THE REASON THEY LOST!
I liked what Starks brought to the PHI game. I don't want him to be S.Gado, though, and there is that potential. Frankly, I don't care if he's Gado or A. Green; ATL has more to game plan for, and I see a W at the end.
January 11, 2011 at 08:00 pm
Hold up there Captain CapsLock, ARod audibled the first qb sneak.
Although that doesn't excuse MM calling it again...still scratching my head about that one.
January 11, 2011 at 10:28 am
I generally agree that it's too soon to tell if the Packers have a real running game on which they can depend, game after game, to move the chains and threaten defenses.
I would say that the threat of a real running game will make the Packers more competitive than they have been on offense. It provides opportunities for play-action that wouldn't have been there, and forces defenses to spend a little more time preparing for threats that they wouldn't otherwise honor. That can't help but open things up in the downfield passing game for AR&Co, so I'm liking what they've shown so far and hopeful for more and better. :)
January 11, 2011 at 10:40 am
Do the same thing as last time, only don't fumble on the goal line.
Plus add Starks.
Seems to me we have more Dlinemen back this time too. Put some beef up front there to stop Micheal Turner.
We win this game, we prove ourselves to the league.
January 11, 2011 at 11:38 am
I agree with the article, but I have to tell you--
I just went back through the play-by-play recap of our 1st meeting vs. Atlanta...
It will not take much at all for Starks to improve our running game dramatically (on paper.)
Jackson was simply awful, imo.
http://www.packers.com/assets/docs/gamebooks/2010/101128gamebook_falcons...
PackerAaron
January 11, 2011 at 11:44 am
Go back and watch the game - he's hit behind the line of scrimmage on the majority of his carries.
January 11, 2011 at 07:00 pm
That's what happens when you're doing the 'jitterbug' behind the OL .... Cut & run is the key to the ZBS .....
PackerAaron
January 11, 2011 at 08:04 pm
I totally get what you're saying. And yes, that is sometimes the case w/Jackson. Not in Atlanta. Again - go watch the game. There are several carries where he is getting his moments after getting the handoff. He doesn't even have time to hear the music let a lone jitterbug.
January 11, 2011 at 10:15 pm
This is all terribly correct. However, I still think that with our OL in particular, motivation i.e. having a RB to believe in has more to do with it than anything else. Take a look at the Giants game, their DL is 100 times better than Atlanta's and Sitton, Wells, & the boys performed beautifully bcecause they had something to prove regarding their 'physicality." Ditto now against Atlanta. They'll be ready this week. We should also remember that Wells is a 2 time state wrestling champion who is undersized at Center, so his performance can be largely effected by motivation, not to mention also his inspiration/performance effects the rest of the OL/offense being that he is a central figure/leader at the line of scrimmage.
January 11, 2011 at 12:30 pm
Starks v. San Fran on grass- 75 yards next week on turf v. Lions 10 yds.
Philly fans knew their run defense had turned to the worst in the NFL- so good points. Has to be a different O against Atlanta.
January 11, 2011 at 05:39 pm
Philly's Run D is very similar statistically to Atlanta's. Yes, they were undersized, but 16 games don't lie. If the O line can manage to get Starks even close to 100 yds - we win.
*Assuming no turnovers*
January 11, 2011 at 01:56 pm
I liked the use of Crabtree in the backfield.
January 11, 2011 at 06:27 pm
I like a staff that can put a rookie tight end into the backfield with their rookie running back behind a rookie right tackle and be playing in mid- January.
January 11, 2011 at 06:39 pm
amen
January 12, 2011 at 10:31 am
Well when you put it like that...AWESOME! GO! PACK! GO!
January 11, 2011 at 08:16 pm
FYI - According to G&G today Atlanta is statistically worse against the run that Philly. While they certainly blew up what we called a run game last time with Brandon, it will be very telling (about he and Jackson)to see if Starks has success this time.
GBP 4 LIFE
January 11, 2011 at 10:17 pm
Thank you Aaron for thinking so well. You always emphasize & bring out some intelligent & relevant corner of thought. Not to mention, you make me think.