Running the Ball

[OrangePA]

It seems to me that the Green Bay game yesterday made clear that running the ball is still very important in the modern game.

Green Bay won the game because it could run the ball and protect Rodgers.

Dallas was successful this year because it had an imposing OL and could run the ball.

Had that DeMarco fumble not occurred - he was running through a giant hole - he would have gone fifty yards for the TD and the Cowboys very well might have won the ballgame.

The Seahawks can run the ball.

Running the ball remains a very important part of the game.

 

[Millhouse]

It seems to me that the Green Bay game yesterday made clear that running the ball is still very important in the modern game.

Green Bay won the game because it could run the ball and protect Rodgers.

Dallas was successful this year because it had an imposing OL and could run the ball.

Had that DeMarco fumble not occurred - he was running through a giant hole - he would have gone fifty yards for the TD and the Cowboys very well might have won the ballgame.

The Seahawks can run the ball.

Running the ball remains a very important part of the game.

i don't know, i look at the playoffs this year and i see amazing qb play every game

once you get to the playoffs, it helps but it's not essential, look at NE and Indy

carolina ran for more than seattle

Green bay didn't run for that much more than dallas - bigger difference through the air

patriots don't even bother with it

 

[OrangePA]

i don't know, i look at the playoffs this year and i see amazing qb play every game

once you get to the playoffs, it helps but it's not essential, look at NE and Indy

carolina ran for more than seattle

Green bay didn't run for that much more than dallas - bigger difference through the air

patriots don't even bother with it

Green Bay won the game because the Packers ran the ball very effectively.

The yardage numbers simply do not matter or are misleading in this instance.

The ability to run allowed Rodgers to play on one leg and throw basically dink and doink completions.

I understand that NE didn't run all that much - I didn't see the game.

 

[Millhouse]

Green Bay won the game because the Packers ran the ball very effectively.

The yardage numbers simply do not matter or are misleading in this instance.

The ability to run allowed Rodgers to play on one leg and throw basically dink and doink completions.

I understand that NE didn't run all that much - I didn't see the game.

dallas 145 on 28 carries
green bay 119 on 30 carries

green bay threw almost twice as much as dallas

 

[OrangePA]

dallas 145 on 28 carries
green bay 119 on 30 carries

green bay threw almost twice as much as dallas

But that's not why Green Bay won.

Green Bay won because they could run the ball.

Rodgers couldn't move and really couldn't throw.

But the tremendous ground game allowed him to complete a lot of passes - at times the passes were forward pitches.

Dallas ran the ball well, but the Cowboys made some crucial mistakes that hurt badly including that awful fumble by DeMarco who was about to run for a long TD and the missed FG that gave Green Bay a fairly easy three points at half.

Again stats are nice but in this case they really do not tell the whole story.

 

[MikeSU02]

Not siding one way or the other, just keep in mind Rodgers has a calf injury that doesn't allow to have his normal mobility.

 

[Full_Rebar]

Well Tom Brady had the only rushing attempt for NE in the 2nd half of their game, so I don't know if running is as important as using your strength against your opponent's weakness. I'm sure the Patriots could have let Blount try and run against Ngata, or they could simply throw towards the waiver wire pick-up at corner all day.

 

[OrangePA]

Well Tom Brady had the only rushing attempt for NE in the 2nd half of their game, so I don't know if running is as important as using your strength against your opponent's weakness. I'm sure the Patriots could have let Blount try and run against Ngata, or they could simply throw towards the waiver wire pick-up at corner all day.

Obviously a great QB like Tom Brady can and does make a big difference in an offense by throwing the ball.

The point is that a great ground game can be invaluable to an offense.

If you can impose your will on a defense by running the ball, you give yourself a great chance to win the game - you control the clock, you control possession and you make the passing game that much easier - even with a QB who can barely move.

The effectiveness of a ground game can still make a huge difference in today's game.

And the Packers proved that yesterday - while the Cowboys have proved that all season - what a difference it makes when you have a strong OL and can run the ball between the tackles.

 

[Millhouse]

But that's not why Green Bay won. Green Bay won because they could run the ball. Rodgers couldn't move and really couldn't throw. But the tremendous ground game allowed him to complete a lot of passes - at times the passes were forward pitches. Dallas ran the ball well, but the Cowboys made some crucial mistakes that hurt badly including that awful fumble by DeMarco who was about to run for a long TD and the missed FG that gave Green Bay a fairly easy three points at half. Again stats are nice but in this case they really do not tell the whole story.

These aren't obscure stats.

 

[Scooch]

Yes, being good at running, or passing, or ideally both, helps a team win.

We've been better at running than passing in most seasons over the past 15 years, but we've mostly sucked at offense in general.

 

[OrangePA]

Yes, being good at running, or passing, or ideally both, helps a team win.

We've been better at running than passing in most seasons over the past 15 years, but we've mostly sucked at offense in general.

I do not recall the Orange offense having a dominant running game in a long time.

I do recall that in the past, when we have run the ball well - example at BC in 2004 when both Rhodes and Diamond had big games - we have won big.

What we have seen on the Hill over the past decade or so hardly compares to Green Bay or Dallas or Ohio State last night and is pretty irrelevant to the discussion.

 

[Scooch]

I do not recall the Orange offense having a dominant running game in a long time.

I do recall that in the past, when we have run the ball well - example at BC in 2004 when both Rhodes and Diamond had big games - we have won big.

What we have seen on the Hill over the past decade or so hardly compares to Green Bay or Dallas or Ohio State last night and is pretty irrelevant to the discussion.

What's the discussion, again?

The Pats beat the Ravens by attempting 51 passes and running 14 times (and all of 1 time in the 2nd half). Does that proove that passing is still "very important in the modern game"?

I sincerely don't get it.

 

[Millhouse]

What's the discussion, again?

The Pats beat the Ravens by attempting 51 passes and running 14 times (and all of 1 time in the 2nd half). Does that proove that passing is still "very important in the modern game"?

I sincerely don't get it.

he didn't watch that game and refuses to look at numbers so it doesn't count