2022 Offensive Line

[Mr. Fussnputz]

Once Jenkins is back, Hanson will be cut. Newman goes to right G. (Nijman-Runyan-Myers-Newman-Jenkins) Market down. 

[incognito_man]

15 minutes ago, R T said:

Barnes to the IR and Jones to the 53, would make sense. 

Caleb would be a dominate ILB

[Refugee]

13 minutes ago, R T said:

Barnes to the IR and Jones to the 53, would make sense. 

Seems like the most reasonable move.  11 at Oline is plenty but not when 2 and with JRJ maybe 3 starters are not able to play. As much as the young guys’ have potential, I really want our tackles back to get this offense on track vs. some tough defenses we’ll be facing. 

[R T]

6 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

Caleb would be a dominate ILB

With Bakh and Jenkins hinted to already being out and JRJ questionable covering depth on the OL trumps a 4th ILB for now. I would also expect Wilborn to be a PS call up on Saturday for the Bears game. 

[craig]

RT, 1st half run plays.  6 of 8 were bad/failed plays; 1 was very successful; one was decent/OK/good. 

Not a good success ratio.  In addition to those 8 running plays, there was a very successful end around gadget play to Watson, and a Rodgers kneel-down.  

Decent/good was a Dillon 4-yard run on a 1st-and-10.  The very successful non-gadget run was Jones for 10 on 2nd-and-10 after the Watson play.  The other six running plays were all loser runs.   All those failed runs gave the Vikings an easy 

1. 2nd-and 10, Jones right end for 10.  WIN!!!
2. 2nd-and-10, Jones RT for 3.  Lose
3. 1st and 10:  Dillon RG for 4.   Decent.  
4. 2nd-and-6:  Dillon RG for 2.  Lose.
5. 1st-10.  Dillon for 2.  Lose
6. 1st-10.  Dillon LT for 3.  Lose
7. 1st-10:  End-Around to Watson for 7.  WIN
8. 1st-and-9:  Jones LG for 2.  Lose.
9. 4th-and-1:  Dillon for 0.  Lose.  
10. 1st-and-10:  Rodgers kneels.  -1.  

[craig]

Of those runs, I think Jones run was around the edge?  If my memory serves, then Dillon's 4-yard plunge was the only run inside the tackles that wasn't a loser play. 

With the Vikings controlling the inside, I think after half-time the Packers maybe tried to adjust and go outside more often?  They had a couple of very successful outside runs by Jones and Dillon, a couple of very successful reverses, and a couple of quick swing passes to Jones or Dillon around the edge?  They did have three inside runs that got 2-4 yards, including the Dillon 2-yard TD.  Or was the big Jones run for 29 an inside run, inside the tackle, maybe?  

On the game, running inside the tackles got the Dillon TD; there was on other 1st down on 3rd-and-1 where Dillon got 3 yards.  But yeah, running around the O-line seemed to work than running between or behind them.  

With the couple of reverses working well, I imagine Roquan Smith and the Bears might spend some film time trying to recognize those. 

[R T]

11 minutes ago, craig said:

Of those runs, I think Jones run was around the edge?  If my memory serves, then Dillon's 4-yard plunge was the only run inside the tackles that wasn't a loser play. 

With the Vikings controlling the inside, I think after half-time the Packers maybe tried to adjust and go outside more often?  They had a couple of very successful outside runs by Jones and Dillon, a couple of very successful reverses, and a couple of quick swing passes to Jones or Dillon around the edge?  They did have three inside runs that got 2-4 yards, including the Dillon 2-yard TD.  Or was the big Jones run for 29 an inside run, inside the tackle, maybe?  

On the game, running inside the tackles got the Dillon TD; there was on other 1st down on 3rd-and-1 where Dillon got 3 yards.  But yeah, running around the O-line seemed to work than running between or behind them.  

With the couple of reverses working well, I imagine Roquan Smith and the Bears might spend some film time trying to recognize those. 

There are just so many variables to this craig and I just have to much yard work to do to spend my afternoon going over many of them. Different defenses are structured differently though, and the yardage obtained may well vary week-to-week in how it is obtained. Minnesota has two very good run stuffing anchors in the middle of their defense, so you are going penalize the 6.2 yards a carry because they didn't run over the top of the strength of their run defense. This isn't the University of Wisconsin playing Concordia-Moorhead where the OL just blows every defender off the line of scrimmage, it's the NFL and you get the yardage however you can get it and 6.2 is still 6.2.    

[craig]

2 hours ago, Refugee said:

These WYMM segments are pretty good. Of course, it’s the highs not the lows being shown but here are some positive examples of Tom’s work. Nothing spectacular but he might earn some consideration for more time.

https://www.packers.com/news/what-you-might-ve-missed-respectable-relief

Footwork looks good.  In the couple of pass-play clips, he looks like he's getting pushed back into the pocket pretty easily.  I'd guess if defense knows he's going to be starting, they'll probably game-plan to just push him into Rodgers lap on every play?  

[vegas492]

18 minutes ago, craig said:

Footwork looks good.  In the couple of pass-play clips, he looks like he's getting pushed back into the pocket pretty easily.  I'd guess if defense knows he's going to be starting, they'll probably game-plan to just push him into Rodgers lap on every play?  

Did they show him (Tom) literally whiffing on Tomlinson?

I saw that when he played guard in the pre-season too.

What was impressive about it back then, is that he was beaten quickly and decisively on one play.  The next play, he buried his guy.

So, if you see the play I'm talking about, see what comes next.  Because I did not.  But if I had to guess, my guess would be that he won his next rep just as decisively.

[craig]

15 minutes ago, R T said:

There are just so many variables to this craig and I just have to much yard work to do to spend my afternoon going over many of them. Different defenses are structured differently though, and the yardage obtained may well vary week-to-week in how it is obtained. Minnesota has two very good run stuffing anchors in the middle of their defense, so you are going penalize the 6.2 yards a carry because they didn't run over the top of the strength of their run defense. This isn't the University of Wisconsin playing Concordia-Moorhead where the OL just blows every defender off the line of scrimmage, it's the NFL and you get the yardage however you can get it and 6.2 is still 6.2.    

Agree that 6.2 is good, for that game. 

• Going 1-6-1 on run plays in the first half, to help set up the shutout blowout, wasn't good? 
• The gadget reverses worked and were fun.  Different defenses are structured differently, so I'm not sure against how many teams those will work, or how often you can run them, probably not very often?   But yeah, I guess they should keep running those as long as they work.
• I'm glad it went better 2nd half.  I'm not sure how much of that was the excellence of our o-line, versus Donatell shifting pass-prevent, and being OK to let the Packers run down clock?   Hopefully they'll be able to run like that in future games before reaching double-digit deficits?  
• I'm fine with shifting away from running up the middle when your o-line is outclassed and outphysicaled.  No fault with MLF trying something with more chance to succeed.  
• Average is a useful, but sometimes overrated and simplistic stat.  Because average is so heavily impacted on the explosive runs.  A couple of explosives can make for a lovely average, even while the median run is failing, is setting up lousy down-and-distance, and is inviting punt. 
• Running is supposed to set up pass and reduce pressure, per cliche.  But often failed runs instead set up big-time pressure by creating long 3rd and 2nd-downs.  That was the 1st-half story.  
• The passing game was obviously bad, and the o-line was outclassed and outphysicaled for pass-pro too.  Perhaps the existing line will make some anti-awful improvement moving forward? 
• Or, as I've hoped all off-season, hopefully Jenkins and Bakhti will come back and EVERYTHING will flow.  Pass pro flips from bad to excellent, Rodgers has time to see, receivers have time to get open, rhythm builds.  Pass pro flips from bad to excellent, you don't need to keep in TE's and RB's to protect, and can send out more possible targets.  And since pass sets up the run, *if* passing is good, the run will benefit tremendously.  

 

[Scoremore]

Packers signed Caleb Jones to the active roster.  Barnes to IR.

[Sandy]

5 hours ago, craig said:

Agree that 6.2 is good, for that game. 

• Going 1-6-1 on run plays in the first half, to help set up the shutout blowout, wasn't good? 
• The gadget reverses worked and were fun.  Different defenses are structured differently, so I'm not sure against how many teams those will work, or how often you can run them, probably not very often?   But yeah, I guess they should keep running those as long as they work.
• I'm glad it went better 2nd half.  I'm not sure how much of that was the excellence of our o-line, versus Donatell shifting pass-prevent, and being OK to let the Packers run down clock?   Hopefully they'll be able to run like that in future games before reaching double-digit deficits?  
• I'm fine with shifting away from running up the middle when your o-line is outclassed and outphysicaled.  No fault with MLF trying something with more chance to succeed.  
• Average is a useful, but sometimes overrated and simplistic stat.  Because average is so heavily impacted on the explosive runs.  A couple of explosives can make for a lovely average, even while the median run is failing, is setting up lousy down-and-distance, and is inviting punt. 
• Running is supposed to set up pass and reduce pressure, per cliche.  But often failed runs instead set up big-time pressure by creating long 3rd and 2nd-downs.  That was the 1st-half story.  
• The passing game was obviously bad, and the o-line was outclassed and outphysicaled for pass-pro too.  Perhaps the existing line will make some anti-awful improvement moving forward? 
• Or, as I've hoped all off-season, hopefully Jenkins and Bakhti will come back and EVERYTHING will flow.  Pass pro flips from bad to excellent, Rodgers has time to see, receivers have time to get open, rhythm builds.  Pass pro flips from bad to excellent, you don't need to keep in TE's and RB's to protect, and can send out more possible targets.  And since pass sets up the run, *if* passing is good, the run will benefit tremendously.  

 

The disconnect with your argument is you're assuming we're all agreeing with your assessment of what is good and what is bad in the running game. 

Three yard runs to set up 3rd and short or second and mid are positive plays that help you get closer to the goal. The issue was they didn't run frequently enough - especially in a game where Rodgers was clearly shaking off a lot of rust.

I hope next season the coaching staff figures out how to wake the team up for week one. Critical playoff positioning is already on the line. Luckily the conference sucks this year so we still have a good shot at the top seed.

[squire12]

20 minutes ago, Sandy said:

The disconnect with your argument is you're assuming we're all agreeing with your assessment of what is good and what is bad in the running game. 

Three yard runs to set up 3rd and short or second and mid are positive plays that help you get closer to the goal. The issue was they didn't run frequently enough - especially in a game where Rodgers was clearly shaking off a lot of rust.

I hope next season the coaching staff figures out how to wake the team up for week one. Critical playoff positioning is already on the line. Luckily the conference sucks this year so we still have a good shot at the top seed.

Going off expected points per drive/ play, a 3 yard run on 1st and 10 is not a positive play for the offense. 

Neither is a 3 yard run ro set up 3rd down a positive play for the offense.

https://www.nfeloapp.com/analysis/expected-points-added-epa-nfl/

@Norm

Insert your gif on computers/ analytics here!!!!

Edited September 14, 2022 by squire12

[HighCalebR]

8 hours ago, incognito_man said:

Caleb would be a dominate ILB

I would be so ******* good. If only I didnt take an arrow in the knee senior year!

[craig]

Standard is that <4 yards on 1st down is a bad run.  Running for 2 or 3 on 2nd and 10 is pretty unambiguously bad.  

"We should run more" sounds great, but you only get so many plays.  If you aren't running plays that actually convert first downs, you don't get any more offensive plays until you get the ball back.  It's just hard to run a ton of running plays if they aren't actually producing first downs.  

Wear them down is a cool hypothetical.  But NFL defenders don't that worn down by 1-2-3-punt and then getting to rest on the sideline.