McCarthy's Mis-Use Of Running Backs Is Criminal
Mike McCarthy and his running game are suffering from a case of paralysis by analysis.
By PackerAaron
I had touched on this topic previously, during an episode of Packer Transplants, so forgive me if this comes off as redundant, but it's reached a crisis point in my mind.
Mike McCarthy, and to some extent Joe Philbin, is handcuffing the offense by over-thinking and over-analyzing every use of formation and personnel, especially in the running game. During the game, I was cursing McCarthy for all the toss plays he was running to the strong side against the Jets extremely active front seven. But I never want to say too much about playcalling and game-planing before going back and watching the game again, especially when I've been at a game. I'm just way too caught up in the emotions of the game to judge anything live.
Well, watching the game again yesterday, it was even worse than I thought. Way too many "cute" decisions in personnel. Ohhh...they'll never expect John KUHN to take a toss! Yeah - there's a reason Mike. Because they don't NEED to worry about it due to the speed and strength of their front. On one toss right in the first quarter, Kuhn had a gigantic cutback lane that he could have hit for a big gain. But you know what? That's not John's strong suit. You know what he does best? That's right - barrel into guys. So that's exactly what he did. Barrel into a wall of Packers and Jets players for a gain of three yards.
Later in the game, when faced with a 3rd and short, Brandon Jackson was called upon...to run a dive play into the heart of the Jets defense. Jackson came up short and the Packers had to punt. Gee, if only the Packers had a big, bruising runner that excelled at barreling into guys. Oh wait, that's right, they do! His name is John Kuhn! Too bad he was relegated to asinine toss plays on Sunday.
I understand the thinking - trust me I do. And Jackson and Kuhn HAVE been successful in those role-reversals before. (Jackson scored from the one yard line last week and Kuhn had an 18 yard gain against the Bears on a toss play) But those plays have been the exception - not the rule.
What pisses me off the most is the misuse of Brandon Jackson. McCarthy indicated after the Buffalo game that they didn't want to subject Jackson to 20-25 carries a game because they didn't think his body could handle it. I'm sorry, but I think that's a load of crap.
Bob McGinn makes a perfect point in his film review of the Jets game:
Brandon Jackson has had his share of injuries. What running back hasn't? But the more Jackson performs as featured back, the more you appreciate his toughness. He takes these hellacious shots three or four times every week, but the man never flinches. There isn't a self-promoting bone in his body, either.
I could not agree more.
People keep dogging Jackson for all the things he isn't. I wish Packer fans could give him credit for what he is - a tough as nails runner who isn't being given near the chance he should. McCarthy's misuse of both Jackson and John Kuhn is near criminal.
After the Jets game, McCarthy hinted that he may finally be seeing the light:
Frankly, I’ll take responsibility for the offense; we simplified a lot of things based on the way we viewed them as a defense. We probably overanalyzed certain situations and I thought we played that way in the first half, especially on third down; we just couldn’t extend a drive there. We came in at halftime, went back to the basics, I thought we moved the ball very well, but we had the costly penalties on those first two series and it was a quick third quarter. We need to clean some things up on offense, and obviously be more productive in points. The run game, I have to give to credit to their run defense, I thought we’d be able to come in here and run the ball more efficiently.
Perhaps if you used your personnel the right way, you would have Mike.
PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHEESEHEAD NATION WEEKLY NEWSLETTER HERE.
__________________________
Comments (42)
November 02, 2010 at 09:54 am
Attended the game as well, and thought the same thing when I saw them toss to Kuhn multiple times. I haven't re-watched the game yet, but one specific play I remember being annoyed with was a shotgun pitch to Kuhn on the right-hand side. This is a play in which he has no momentum to the line, and of course the play went no where.
I have seen the play used in the past as well, with Grant being the most effective with it. Even then, Grant could only net a few yards because the play has almost no deception.
The way Jackson and Kuhn could compliment each other could make for a great running game, if they are utilized the way they should be.
November 02, 2010 at 10:06 am
I agree, i hate the toss play to John Kuhn. but on the 3rd and short play you have to wonder if MM was a little reluctant to go with Kuhn after he didn't make the 4th and short last week. I know he made the first one but very close to being stopped.
PackerAaron
November 02, 2010 at 10:16 am
Both of those were from an up-back position though. Put him back at tailback behind Hall and let him plow through there.
November 02, 2010 at 10:18 am
are we gonna activate James Starks
PackerAaron
November 02, 2010 at 10:27 am
I doubt it.
November 02, 2010 at 10:34 am
James Starks is not the answer. He missed his SR year...all of training camp...all of pre-season...1st 8 games of the regular season. To think he'll be able to come in and make a difference is pure, unadulterated, fantasy thinking. We have what we have and the answer is going to have to be to use what we have appropriately.
November 02, 2010 at 11:13 am
Why are we wasting a roster spot on Nance since he has not shown anything worthy to increase his play time.I say give Starks the chance.The worst that happens is Starks does what Nance IS doing,taking up space.
PackerAaron
November 02, 2010 at 11:18 am
WE haven't seen anything because we aren't at practice.
November 02, 2010 at 11:55 am
Then whatever he(Nance) is or is not doing in practice,seems to make the ASSUMPTION of him not progressing enough to play more is...validating using or giving Starks his chance.
As you have said Aaron,"We aren't at practice",which makes me as cautious as walking behind an usher and his flashlight,hoping he knows where he's going.
November 02, 2010 at 06:20 pm
It has already been stated that the language and concepts in Atlanta's scheme (that Nance came out of) is as different from the Packers as you can get.
I guarantee that Nance hasn't been getting play time because MM is worried about him missing a protection call and getting Aaron Rodgers killed. That being said, it was rumored that Nance was going to get extended play time last sunday vs. the Jets, but then he ended up twisting his ankle.
I wouldn't count Nance out quite yet... And Starks will be no where near football shape until he gets a full offseason conditioning program training camp under his belt. It will be interesting to see if the Packers IR starks or think they can slip him by waivers. I don't think he'll go unnoticed on the waiver wire; so I hope the Pack put him on IR.
November 02, 2010 at 06:15 pm
The little amount of film on Nance I've found makes me feel pretty good about him.
This kid has all the tools to be a productive runner in a ZBS. To be completely honest, of all the Packers HBs, he looks like his skill set is the most well suited for our run scheme. And yes, that includes Grant.
Of course, that doesn't mean he'll end up tearing it up. But he sure looks like he has a good chance to mesh really well.
November 02, 2010 at 10:21 am
Spot on. Jackson DESERVES to get more opportunities. I love me some John Kuhn, but C'MON! I like McCarthy, I truly do, but when our offense struggles he is too damn bull-headed and keeps getting deeper in his self-proclaimed "triple-header" playbook! Kind of reminds me of Martz in that aspect. I really think Jackson could be a much more viable weapon if used correctly.
November 02, 2010 at 10:33 am
jackson deserves 15 carries a game at least.. and i dont know that having kuhn go up the gut isnt kind of predictable on 3rd and short.. id rather take my chances on a WR screen or a pop pass than hand the ball off in that situation.. i prefer running the ball on first or 2nd down nd passing on 3rd.. no matter the distance especially if your running the ball effectively they will expect a run on 3rd and short
November 02, 2010 at 11:01 am
Noticed last night how Manning and Caldwell make an emphasis on running pass plays in which the running back is the primary target, even if it's just a dump off into the flat. Rodgers hesitates too long to get the ball to Jackson there.
November 02, 2010 at 11:15 am
I have to admit, I am in the boat of not liking Jackson as the featured back. But dammit, I agree with you that he needs to be given the opportunities, which McCarthy isn't giving him.
I love Kuhn, but I think its silly that he is used as often as he is.
November 02, 2010 at 11:20 am
If they are gonna line up both Kuhn and Jackson in the backfield then they really need to run some pitch and stretch plays to Jackson that will help set up Kuhn later in the game.
When Jackson is successful on those types of plays then teams tend to forget about Kuhn a little bit.
I don't like to see Kuhn running from his FB position unless MM has sufficiently established Jackson as a threat to run in the game. That or run Kuhn from that position at times other than obvious short yardage situations.
I do however like the fact that MM has started using a little deception with the WR reverse action we seen from James Jones this past game. I want to see some more of that type of thing even if he never acually runs the reverse for reals.
Its a hell of a way to get a WR running full speed into the flat and when the defense ignores him after a few looks it could lead to a big play for said receiver.
November 02, 2010 at 11:43 am
Maybe after all the injuries to this team, McCarthy is afraid BJax is gonna get hurt if he uses him too much?
November 02, 2010 at 11:49 am
Can we please get Dmitri Nance some carries?!
November 02, 2010 at 12:00 pm
I agree. on 3rd and short, put Hall infront of Kuhn and pound the A Gap. If the line does their job and Hall gets enough of a block, Kuhn will easilly pick up 2-3 yards. So what if they know it's coming. they have to stop it. They knew Lombardi was running the sweep, but couldn't stop it. if everybody does their job, it will work time & time again. Go Pack !!!!!!!!!!!
November 02, 2010 at 12:18 pm
on Packer forum we been discussing how Jackson is not great but just good enough..Some think I am full of it, some agree with me
http://www.packerforum.com/f8/can-we-discuss-current-running-backs-23924...
November 02, 2010 at 01:15 pm
I think the offensive woes have two culprits...
(1)
I've heard talk of McCarthy being cerebral, a strategist, genius, etc. But when he puts the onus of an 18,000 page playbook on skill players with low Wonderlic scores, he's not being too smart. I've seen many instances of pass routes that are complete train wrecks -- receiver running the wrong route, QB not throwing to the correct spot? It's difficult to tell who is responsible -- usually a player's body language will let you know that it was "my bad", or hand gestures will clarify a route. What I've seen lately is a player trotting back to the huddle, and Rodgers looking away.
Is the offense simply too complex?
(2)
Another problem is the offensive line. On running plays, I NEVER see the o-line push back the d-line -- rarely it's a stalemate, but much more frequently it's the d-line advancing. With the defense in the backfield, the play goes to hell -- Jackson freezes; Kuhn barrels into someone's back, or trips over someone.
While the stats show a team with a 4.2 rushing average, the stats also show a team that has 2 runs of 20+ yards -- which ranks 25th in the league. Without help from the O-line, a runner can't get to the 2nd level to reel off a long one.
November 02, 2010 at 01:25 pm
You raise a couple of very interesting questions/points. Regarding point number 2, it would seem to argue that it doesn't matter if it's Jackson, Kuhn, Nance, Starks, (or M. Lynch or D. Williams or fill in the blank with whatever name TT was too weak and gutless to go get) whose doing the running. If the D line is in the backfield, it's going to be a problem for most any running back.
November 02, 2010 at 01:44 pm
I'm not trying to be harsh.
I'm not trying to be a jerk.
But with the o-line knowing the snap count, they still can't get push on the d-line.
Are they undersized?
Are they weak?
If they're going to lose the mano-a-mano battle, then why not incorporate traps, or some other technique - too minimize the physical mis-match?
I think Wells is small -- particularly comparted to NTs these days.
I think Colledge is not strong, and uses bad hand technique as well as poor leverage.
I think Clifton is not very flexible.
I think Sitton can latch onto and neutralize most any opponent.
Right tackle is a work in progress.
I think the group is miscast as a ZBS crew (if anyone really believes GB runs it).
They're not roadgraders.
They're not an athletic or finesse oriented line.
I don't know what they are -- more square pegs in round holes, than anything else...
November 02, 2010 at 02:03 pm
Then by saying it wouldn't matter who the RB is with this O-Line and the defense in the backfield on our run plays is solely pointed at the players.
Do you think there may be the SLIGTHEST chance of PREDICTABLITY that is enhancing the defense to have that better push,since they know what,when, where and who is coming and going.
Since we don't have a very forceful run game we are "predictable based on inability",and our passing game sets up our run,which has been evaporating(possibly due to the run),stopping our(ahem)feature back is even easier.
Grant is not a great back,but a very good RB and he did force defenses to account and that makes a passing game better.The better defenses we play don't need to truly account for BJ or KUHN.
Actually,I'm not sure any defense is being forced to account for our run game which is HURTING the passing game.
Having another RB that can catch the screens and can run will be beneficial with BJ as you can screen to either side.Kuhn is not that guy,Nance is not due to lack of play so give it to Starks,nothing to lose but only gain.
November 02, 2010 at 03:02 pm
What's predictable is that the Packers will pass more than they run.
Perhaps defenses are thinking they'll rush like gang-busters and pressure the passer, or luck up and collapse a run.
Who could fault that reasoning?
If the runner gets past the line, the secondary will tackle -- as neither Jackson, nor Kuhn are what I would describe as "elusive".
November 02, 2010 at 01:34 pm
::claps:: Great comment!
November 02, 2010 at 01:24 pm
So is it safe to say MM is not solving math equations on a hallway blackboard at Harvard in his spare time?
November 02, 2010 at 03:13 pm
I think the opposite. He thinks football is a math equation and loves algebra too much. He gets lost in fancy details and manipulations and then loses track of the basics.
He doesn't get out of his skull much.
November 02, 2010 at 02:48 pm
Does 'toughness' and not flinching at blows really say anything about a guy's injury proneness, though? I agree that we're not using Jackson and Kuhn properly, but I think we have to give the benefit of the doubt to the coaching staff on this 20-25 carries thing. If we lost Jackson for the season, it'd be ugly.
Mainly though, I'm just impressed with your use of 'what pisses me off the most'.
November 02, 2010 at 03:39 pm
Who gives a shit about any of this?
As long as the defense keeps pitching shutouts we should be
"A-OK"!
November 03, 2010 at 07:28 am
How long do you want to plan on shutouts? They're a rarity in the NFL for a reason.
November 02, 2010 at 04:04 pm
Still crying out for more screen passes and swing passes to Jackson.Rogers can hold on to the ball too long,teams know this and will be vulnerable to these plays!! Would like to see at least 5 or 6 of these plays Sunday night against an aggressive front 7 of Cowboys!
November 02, 2010 at 06:58 pm
Right, right right. Jackson out of the backfield..it's so open. Maybe it's our December and January surprise, however.
November 02, 2010 at 04:08 pm
"Grant is not a great back, but a very good RB and he did force defenses to account and that makes a passing game better.The better defenses we play don’t need to truly account for BJ or KUHN."
This is the crux of the issue ...... I'm all for giving BJ 20+ carries so everyone (once & for all) can finally realize that BJ's attributes are a few pass receptions, a draw play or two & some good blitz pick-ups .......
He's not capable of being a featured back ...... Never has & never will be ..... He's has one speed with no burst, he stutter-steps nearly every carry and is indecisive about his cuts .......
I knew this blog was coming because Nagler's boy ain't getting it done ..... Have to deflect the blame somewhere, anywhere other than the source.
November 02, 2010 at 06:57 pm
WoodyG - you're absolutely right.
BJAX is stiff & non-fluid, it's like he's muscle-bound, or something. His gait is limited, or short, like he's taking baby-steps. His lateral movement is suspect, or worse: non-existent.
I would love for him to break out and be the man -- but it's not in him. This is another one of Ted's wasted 2nd round picks (witness: Colledge, Pat Lee, Brohm -- serviceable enough, but not at that round/price)
November 02, 2010 at 07:01 pm
Jackson had to start beefing up to block lineman if you'll all recall last year.
And remember he is all of 25
November 02, 2010 at 06:19 pm
What measure are you using for 'not getting it done', Woody?
He may or may not have the ability to be a featured back; but we can only judge him on the chances he gets, and the numbers seem to suggest that he's doing fine.
November 02, 2010 at 06:25 pm
As I stated on one of the other article comments, there's no good reason for John Kuhn to get 8 touches. At least four of those touches should have gone to BRandon Jackson...
November 02, 2010 at 06:38 pm
may I stipulate that Kuhn's "touches" not be those that incorporate any running parallel to the LOS, nor those involving him trying to "juke", or make any attempt at deception...
November 02, 2010 at 07:52 pm
Dude, really? I'm not thrilled about the run game but... "Perhaps if you used your personnel the right way, you would have Mike."
That's not a good look for you. I'm willing to bet that coach knows a hair more about his personnel and how to use them than the average blogger. Call it a hunch. Monday morning QB syndrome. |If you want to do that this isn't the place lol.
PackerAaron
November 02, 2010 at 09:26 pm
You're right. My blog is certainly not the place to give my opinion. (rolls eyes)
November 02, 2010 at 09:57 pm
I completely agree with this. Watching the Colts game made me wish that we ran our offense like they do. They use their backs correctly (even with the injury to Addai) and they throw slants, screens, and they throw horizontally. Do we do any of that? No. I haven't looked at the stats since, but before the Vikings game we were 27th in screen efficiency and 29th in rushing attempts. And actually, I would argue that Jackson DOES have the ability to be a complete back. Over on Advanced NFL Stats.com, they have Jackson ranked 12th as a running back while Kuhn is ranked towards the bottom. While not traditional, Advanced NFL Stats is interesting because they rank based on how much a player helps or hurts their team (they have a full explanation on their site). Jackson can be a complete back. He just needs to be used correctly. And McCarthy should not keep giving tosses to Kuhn. I think it's fairly obvious that the Packers should use Jackson as their feature back and Kuhn in short yardage situations.