The Packers Need to Focus on the Run Game

The Packers have one of the best offenses, likely even the best, in the NFL. Having an elite offense does not mean that they can just go do whatever they want and it will work. If it wasn't for great defensive play over the last two weeks the Packers would have likely lost both games because in both games the offense was decidedly flat.

Against the 49ers two weeks ago the overall pass/run numbers weren't that bad. The Packers had 30 called runs vs 38 called passes, all-in-all not too bad of an attack that was balanced enough. The problem is those numbers are skewed towards extra running attempts at the end of the game. The Packers had 11 drives that game, in the first 9 drives they only called for a run 21 times in their 62 plays, roughly one third of the time. That's not acceptable and to me helps explain why the offense was flat. The weird part is, they weren't even running poorly, Eddie Lacy averaged 5.0 yards per carry on the day. The play calling just got away from them.

Last Sunday against the Rams was even worse.

The Packers had 12 drives against the Rams, on the first 11 of them they only called a run play on 15 of the 55 plays and only once, on the second drive, did they even call a run on back-to-back plays. That right there is the reason why the offense is struggling.

That's 36 called run plays out of 117 total plays (31 percent) for the drives that weren't trying to run out the clock the last two games. To put it another way, they are passing the ball on nearly 70 percent of the plays... which is absurd and not sustainable.

Unlike in San Francisco, part of the reason why the Packers got away from the run on Sunday is that it simply was not effective. The run game not being effective is not a reason to get away from it though. In order for the passing game to succeed, especially against a defense like the Rams who have a strong front four, you have to make them at least respect the chance of the run. Even if it isn't working, keep going to it.

When you don't run the ball and you are playing a defensive line that can get to the quarterback often enough without help from blitzing linebackers or secondary players, you get this:

The Rams did this a lot to the Packers on Sunday and it worked well. They would rush four and drop seven, causing Rodgers to have to settle for using his own legs to gain a couple yards on the ground. The reason they were able to do this is because they didn't have to respect the Packers' run game. When teams are doing this to them, the Packers need to pound the ball down their throat. They can't keep trying to pass their way out of that issue, they need to beat them with the run. 

When the Packers did run the ball, they saw a lot of this from the Rams:

St. Louis played incredibly aggressive when they saw a run play, especially in the first half. The offensive line didn't play great either, but in a lot of cases they didn't have much of a chance. The Packers needed to keep going to the run though and eventually they would break some big plays with the Rams selling out like that.

If the Packers stick with the run, not only do I think that they start to run the ball better, but they open up the ability to run play-action and burn the Rams with that. This will eventually keep the defense honest which is only going the help the run and pass games and keep the defense guessing. That's when Aaron Rodgers and the Packers are really dangerous.

The last couple of weeks the direction the Packers ran the ball, those few times they did run the ball, became predictable. Against San Francisco it wasn't until Eddie Lacy's 12th carry that they actually ran a play to the right. At first I thought this was just to protect Lacy's sprained right ankle, but once they did run a play to the right, only two of Lacy's last seven runs ended up going to the left, including the plays to ice the game.

The same trend happened against St. Louis, but in the opposite direction. Only three of Lacy's 13 runs for the game went to the left, including five of the first six going to the right. Meanwhile Starks had two runs to the left and three runs to the right, a fairly even split.

Not only was the Packers play calling predictable the last couple weeks in terms of run or pass, the direction of their run plays was predictable.

This is something that the Packers have run into a couple times over the last five years, it hasn't happened much the previous two seasons though. I have to wonder if having a new play caller isn't partially responsible. In 2011 and 2012 the Packers had a tendency to rely on the passing attack and forget to run the ball, this would burn them at times. Since then I thought McCarthy had learned his lesson and had actually made the run game a critical part of the offense over the last two years, not just a token play to setup the pass. It is easy to get caught up in what Aaron Rodgers can do, especially when Lacy is banged up, but you have to continue to run the ball. I'm not saying this is on Clements, but it wouldn't shock me if it was.

The nice thing about this is that the Packers are 5-0 despite these issues and it is an easy problem to correct. I would be absolutely shocked if the Packers didn't come out looking to pound the ball and make a statement against San Diego on Sunday. Not only do I think they will do this, I think the offense gets back on track because of this. Granted San Diego doesn't have the defense that the Rams have, but if the Packers continue this pattern of lazy, repetitive, and uninspired play calling that they have done the last two weeks, expect the offense to be flat once again. 

0 points
 

Comments (25)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
packerfan9507's picture

February 13, 2019 at 07:36 pm

Go Pack

0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

October 15, 2015 at 07:49 am

I agree completely with article and partly with your observation. What I learned from my "sports life" is when you underestimate opponent, does not matter how weak that opponent is, you will lose... Packers must not underestimate any opponent, so neither San DIego... It may happen that their banged units suddenly gels and Packers will be in trouble!
Saying that I think we will see Packers win 30-35 to 15-20...

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

October 15, 2015 at 07:21 am

Nice article, Mike. Interesting stats. I don't know why GB ran to the right. Perhaps it was after Long went out?

I've also noticed that the pass routes tend to be outside the numbers. Maybe I am imagining that. However, in your video, the 3 WRs all run routes that stay outside the numbers. The RB chips but then just makes himself available for a pass in the flat, and then finally when Aaron Rodgers is in trouble the RB scrambles over the middle. Richard Rodgers chips on the DE and then runs diagonally towards the numbers as well.

0 points
0
0
Jay Hodgson's picture

October 15, 2015 at 07:55 am

Against cover 1, run routes out side the numbers. Against cover 2, split the safeties both horizontally and high-low. Against cover 3, dig underneath the shell and press the seams.

0 points
0
0
MarkinMadison's picture

October 15, 2015 at 03:43 pm

Nice and concise.

0 points
0
0
MarkinMadison's picture

October 15, 2015 at 09:01 pm

Is ThompsonTwins/Longshanks still lurking?

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

October 15, 2015 at 10:03 pm

Long shanks. That was the name. I couldn't remember what it was.

Yeah he is the same one that attacked Jayme a while back. I hope he is done on this website, because we don't need that on here.

I'm sure he still lingers because he is the one that gives me a dislike every post I make.

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

October 16, 2015 at 05:25 pm

Yes I too noticed an epidemic of dislikes

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

October 16, 2015 at 01:13 pm

Thanks, Jay. There was only one video of a pass play, so I used it. The point however was in general. I was not criticizing GB for running the routes in the video against a single high safety, so I view your response as a non-sequitur. I previously posted charts showing the rarity of completed passes over the middle compared to NE.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/images/FilmRoom/FilmRoom-120414-1.jpg

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/images/FilmRoom/FilmRoom-26122013-05.jpg

0 points
0
0
Jay Hodgson's picture

October 16, 2015 at 04:12 pm

Non-sequitur? Interesting choice of words considering you said, "However, in your video, the 3 WRs all run routes that stay outside the numbers."

I was explaining why. I thought it was on point. Many offenses have automatic checks based on the coverage shell. The west coast sure as hell does, and the ones I listed are the most common.

I'll try harder to not turd drop in the future.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

October 16, 2015 at 05:20 pm

I meant no offense. I can see where the phrase is off-putting. I am sorry.

I did not mean to criticize the routes run in the video which shows a single high safety since those routes are appropriate, but rather to suggest that there have been too few routes run in the middle of the field in general, especially close to the LOS, since my impression is that GB has not encountered single high safeties that much. I have seen a lot of 2 man with corners pressing. Your response was concise. My mistake was mentioning the video at all. I should have been more clear. In my own mind you responded to a point I did not raise, but I blame my hazy post on antihistamines. I was too lazy yesterday being at home with the flu to look for video examples, and today my head is pounding too much to care about GBś route running propensities.

0 points
0
0
Jay Hodgson's picture

October 16, 2015 at 05:26 pm

We're cool. Long week for the both of us. Go Pack!

0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

October 15, 2015 at 07:47 am

The OL should be able to open up some holes against anyone. That said, if we can get people to fear the big pass, the run will open up too.

0 points
0
0
Lphill's picture

October 15, 2015 at 10:37 am

They need to hand the ball off to Lacy not toss it to him so he hesitates to secure it firmly, just hand it off to him while he has a running start and keep his legs moving, a Toss play is JV football .

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

October 15, 2015 at 11:17 am

This is why the Pistol formation is perfect for him. It allows them to be in shotgun, yet allows Lacy to be running towards the LOS before he gets the ball.

I think the toss play works better for a shiftier type of RB. Lacy is more power so he needs that running start.

0 points
0
0
EdsLaces's picture

October 15, 2015 at 12:05 pm

I know right. I hate the toss. I feel that is for rbs with elite speed. Lacy is a power back. Get him the ball between the tackles for Petes sake!

0 points
0
0
Otto's picture

October 15, 2015 at 11:04 pm

From what I've read here, the WRs aren't getting separation. The OL isn't opening holes. The play calling isn't balanced. It sounds like MM needs to "fix" the offense like he did with the D and ST.

As the coaches say, "You've got to win your 1 on 1 battles." They're fortunate their D has carried them this far. It's time for the OL and WRs to start winning their battles.

0 points
0
0
Otto's picture

October 15, 2015 at 11:27 pm

There's an article out there suggesting the 49ers are shopping Vernon Davis for an affordable draft pic. The article said the Packers would be the best fit for him. (I agree) I've been reading that the Packers are looking for Davante Adams to stretch the defense when he gets healthy. I've never really seen that in him. Davis on the other hand can fly.
It would force the defense to play the whole field instead of sitting on the short routes. Since they're sitting on the short routes they can play the run better.
Plus, the idea of AR throwing to a 4.38 TE down the middle is pretty exciting.

(Disclaimer: I am fully aware TT hangs on to draft picks like they're Infinity Stones. I know this is not his MOS. But, he surprised the brethren last year signing Peppers. This could be another Keith Jackson situation.)

0 points
0
0
TKWorldWide's picture

October 16, 2015 at 06:10 am

Same page as you, amigo, on all points.. The intriguing part here is "AFFORDABLE" draft pick!
Hmmm....?

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

October 16, 2015 at 12:58 pm

I had to google ¨Infinity Stones¨ and while I am not upset that I did not get the reference, it is quite apropos.

0 points
0
0
Alvo's picture

October 16, 2015 at 10:15 am

Its really a chicken and egg argument, but the running game simply wasn't working, so continually going to an aspect of the game where you're struggling is disadvantageous. 19 runs for 47 yards isnt good. Picking up only 1 first down via the run isnt good. Our first down running production was poor all game - 10 designed runs for an avg of 2.7 yards, long of 8 vs 13 passes for 5 yard avg with a long of 19. While neither look all that great, the Packers set up way too many 2nd and longs, and would risk setting up even more had they stuck to a broken running game. The Packers only had 2 3rd downs with 3 or fewer yards to go (of 12 plays). And 4 plays on 2nd down with fewer than 5 yards to go. This forced the Packers into a lot more natural passing situations, so there probably weren't as many opportunities to run. Again, chicken and egg.

I do have some criticism for the play calling, however; I was surprised to see mostly vanilla sets which were 3 wide shotgun with Richard Rodgers playing pretty much every snap. In the past few games, Ty and Cobb were lining up in the backfield, and players like Harris, Ripkowski, and Janis seeing some snaps. Last game, there were zero 4 receiver sets (Janis didn't play, and Aby only played on the kneeldown) and I don't believe anyone but Starks, Richard Rodgers, and Lacy lined up in the backfield. Maybe they got a bit too crazy in the 49ers game, but I'd like to see them mix it up a bit more.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

October 16, 2015 at 11:03 am

Yeah, i would have liked to have seen more variety in players and packages on offense. I thought they needed something to jump start the offense.

I am guessing they didn't want to use Cobb or Montgomery in the backfield because the Rams have a great pass rush, and they wanted a bigger RB kept in for blocking.

I think this week we will see that more. At least I hope so anyways because I think the offense is at its best when it uses many different looks.

0 points
0
0
Alvo's picture

October 16, 2015 at 01:53 pm

Agreed and good point. I think Richard Rodgers had a poor game and made the offense seem worse than it was - the sequence in the 4th, Rodgers dropped a pass that would've put the Packers inside the 10, and then committed the hands to the face penalty on the field goal. That drive could have put the Packers up 28-10 and we're probably not panicking about the offense as much. He struggled to break tackles and pick up extra yards like on the 3rd and short in the first quarter. He also had a bad penalty that turned a 10 yard gain into a 1st and 15 from the 5. Without Quarless and with the new short passing game, he has to play better for the Packers offense to succeed.

0 points
0
0
Razor's picture

October 16, 2015 at 11:07 am

Weekend Update
Janis brain the size of a peanut.
Perry wins bet with Neal.
Lacy dancing.
OLB's - what u mean outside contain?
Clean up on O line - mess in run game.
O line - what u mean run block?
Trick play - run right (or left?)
Receivers can't get separation.
Receivers - what u mean separation?
Kuuuuuuhn!

0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

October 16, 2015 at 08:08 pm

Did we win the game?

0 points
0
0