Stale Bread

[Sunshinepacker]

We're in week 2, week 2, week 2. When the steelers have accomplished more than GB has at the end of the year like they have every year, oh wait, they haven't, then we'll talk. Actually we probably won't, because I probably won't watch a complete STeelers game all season to know what they're doing or why

Great way to avoid answering a direct question which might damage your case...

 

[Sunshinepacker]

One of the articles linked yesterday showed the Packers had 3WR, 1TE & 1RB formation almost 78% of the plays run so far. Wouldn't that "mandate" the defense be in their base D or nickel? It's also common knowledge that GB runs the no-huddle or hurry-up offense so that the D can't change personnel. Wouldn't it make more sense to line-up in 4WR, 1RB (Lacy) and "lock-in" the D to Dime?

Since our TE's are average (at best) blockers it would seem that having 4 WR's with the occasional Lacy run against dime D would be a more effective mismatch, wouldn't it?

Shhhh....MM is an offensive genius, it's Rodgers' fault that he's not finding the open guy.

 

[Bagadeez04]

If this is another year of offensive mediocrity, the coach and gm need to stand up and be accountable. The fact that we are 30th in the league in offense with Rodgers at qb is hard to fathom.

I have wondered for a while now, why we continue to use the no huddle? If the advantage gained from this are supposed to be better tempo, tiring defenses and not allowing substitutions, then it would seem to not be working. It hasn't worked for a while now.

How about scrapping the no huddle, slowing things down, getting into a huddle, communicating better between wrs and qb and changing personnel/formations.

It seems like a pretty obvious and simple change to make. It clearly isnt working. Try something else. What gives?

 

[JBlood]

How about scrapping the no huddle

We have an interesting twist on the hurry-up offense. We hurry up and then call time out to avoid delay of game; or we take a delay of game. Sometimes we'll take a delay of game after taking the penalty-avoiding timeout. It's a tortoise hurry up.

 

[7thFloorRA]

https://www.all22.com/team/green-bay-packers-struggling-offense-flawed-by-design

That story is spot on with this offense. Its a mish mash of stuff the shouldn't go together....doesn't go together and requires absurd perfection to pull off. This frankenstein 12 and MM have created needs to be put to rest.

 

[Mondio]

There's something not working in the offense yet, that much is obvious. A lot want to say it's scheme or coaches, yet the stale offense that struggled it's way to 60 yards in 1 half, put up close to 200 working out of the same scheme, installed by the same coaches, run by the same players, against the same quality defense.

Some things need to get better, but most of this is just excuses.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

iWe're in week 2, our offense starts like this every year.

The Packers offense hasn't started that terrible since Rodgers became the starter. The unit is currently 29th in yards per game, 30th in yards per play, 31st in passing yards and passing yards per play.

One of the articles linked yesterday showed the Packers had 3WR, 1TE & 1RB formation almost 78% of the plays run so far. Wouldn't that "mandate" the defense be in their base D or nickel? It's also common knowledge that GB runs the no-huddle or hurry-up offense so that the D can't change personnel. Wouldn't it make more sense to line-up in 4WR, 1RB (Lacy) and "lock-in" the D to Dime?

Since our TE's are average (at best) blockers it would seem that having 4 WR's with the occasional Lacy run against dime D would be a more effective mismatch, wouldn't it?

I would prefer to use different formations on offense more often. I don't care about the defense being allowed to substitute in those situatio s as mostly the no-huddle offense hasn't worked.

Vikings were stopping our running game.

That was true in the first half as the Packers only averaged 2.4 yards per carry. The running game worked way better in the second half (4.3 avg.).