I'm surprised. I think this is the most positive thing I've heard on this site about McCarthy in a long time. The screen is definitely one of the most important aspects of the Packer offense. That Brandon Jackson screen has saved many drives.

The best part of the win was seeing everyone step up when their time came, no doubt about it.

Do you think it was just a coincidence that the screen game improved when Green was re-signed? He was pretty fantastic at running the screen, and when he came back, all of a sudden the rest of the Packers backs could do it, too.

I think that you are seeing the trends in the NFL come full circle. I don't blame McCarthy for the lack of screens, simply because I believe that NFL defenses started scheming for them in the 1990's when SF and GB were killing them with it. NO team over the last ten years or so have been the screen juggernaut the Packers once were, and a lot of that is more in thanks to smaller defensive linemen who have quicker lateral movement.
It will be interesting, though, to see if D's shut it down in the playoffs, or if the Packers can keep it going. Perhaps practicing against a 3-4 has helped the offense in this regard.

Wonderful play, but still not the screens of Holmgren. I don't know if today's defenses make it tougher to execute a classic screen, but this looks like chaos rather than an organized play. I think you hit it on the head when you said Sitton is "locking on and not overshooting his man." Instead of the old fashion X's and O's where you would locate the designated linebacker to block, these linemen get out and look for a man to block in space. The "designated linebacker" from the playbook is probably blitzing from the other side of the field while they drop a nosetackle into coverage or something. So the linemen never know what their going to get. Much tougher now!

About the time the screen play went away was the emergence of the cover 2. A DL that drops into coverage kills a screen, just look at what Jolly has been doing.

Well, yeah they've actually executed it a few times. Bjack hasn't tipped the ball up in the air intead of catching it recently. At least not as much.
The screen is far from being "back."
TT needs to hit on a lightening-in-the-bottle HB with speed who can CATCH.
We don't have a single RB on our roster who can catch the ball consistently and reliably.

Jayme, yes- I think it's coincidence. Ahman Green's presence didn't make the O-line better blockers in the screen game.
.
Nerdmann, We do have Ahman Green on the roster, who can catch the ball consistently and reliably. So that's one.
.
**NEWSFLASH**
.
Lastly, hold onto your hats and socks, ladies and gentlemen. New Orleans waived CB Mike McKenzie today, so be on the look-out for everyone to cry, whine, and bitch when the Packers don't sign him for a play-off run. I just don't think it's even a possibility, as Mike McKenzie made it pretty clear when he left the Packers, he just flat out didn't want to be in Green Bay (Per Andrew Brandt). But who knows? Maybe the lure of the play offs will change McKenzie's outlook on Green Bay, especially since he was two weeks away from playing in them with a contender until this morning.

Was it Sherman at GM or Ted when the McKenzie fiasco went down? that might make a difference if there is a different man in charge. I'd rather take chances with Josh Bell
Another interesting roster move was Arizona making their backup kicker a coach, maybe so Dallas or GB could pick him up.

Sometimes pedestrian is an upgrade.

It seems to me that the screen has become much more popular in the NFL lately. GB is certainly not the only team using it. Just watch...whenever any team is getting the big pass rush, a screen is almost inevitable. JMHO.

I'll just go ahead and state the obvious, then: McKenzie would be a hell of a lot better than Bush as the nickel back. I don't care if he's slower than Bush or less athletic...or whatever..he'd be a better option.

Ruppert: It's a foregone conclusion: anybody's better than Bush.