NFL/Superbowl/Playoffs - DPChallenge Forums

01/11/2008 12:54:55 PM · #251

Originally posted by LoudDog:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by LoudDog:
How did Seattle do against teams with losing records and statistically poor rushing defense?

Just as well as Green Bay. You would need to look at total rushing yards though because time is split between Alexander and Morris. Neither are going to have as many yards or attempts as Grant.

Having watched most of GB's and Seattle's games, GB's running game is clearly better right now. As bad as Seattle's running game has been this year, they were easily better then GB the first 7 games as saying GB was pathetic at rushing at that time was an overstatement. I don't think you'll find an expert that disagrees. I don't think you've watched grant play much??? Look up a news article on him. I'd love to see what would have happened had he been the starter from week #1 assuming he'd hold up all year and not get injured. His rushing total since week 8 (when he became starter) is second only to the NFL MVP LaDainian Tomlinson by only 18 yards!

Man, so now GB has a rusher equal to LaDanian? Man, I've been asleep and missed that one...

Removing the garbage games against the Falcons and Lions, the Packers have 881 yards rushing in your magical "last 9 games". The Seahawks have 804. Less. But not much. Both have played mainly pathetic rushing defenses (with a few exceptions: Baltimore, Arizona, Philadelphia on Seattle's side. Dallas and Minnesota on Green Bay's side). In case we worry that one team favored the pass more during those games, their passing yards are 2338 and 2369. Virtually identical.

The two teams are evenly matched with subtle nuances of difference. Sure, I'd give the running game edge to GB (mainly due to their OL rather than any qualities of their RB), but not by much and it certainly can't qualify as "LaDainian good". That's a complete crock.

01/11/2008 01:06:37 PM · #252

I don't think LoudDog was saying he is as good. But no one else in the League did' better than Grant second half of the season except LT and perhaps Adrian Peterson in Minnesota. Keep in mind however that LT is not playing as good as he was 2 years ago either. Just like Alexander he has been banged up and not playing at 100% potential all season. The thing about Grant is, The Packers picked him up as a 3rd or 4th string back during training camp. He is a first year player and not supposed to play at all, So when he came on and laid out nearly 1000 yards in 9 games. He turned some heads. The local media has been very impressed and have started to create a name for him around here. Now he will be on the national stage and can create a name for himself outside of Wisconsin.

He has potential to be a 2000 yard back if he plays a full scedule and stays healthy in the process. Especially with a killer passing game to support him.

01/11/2008 01:26:49 PM · #253

Oh, I forgot to call this one too. Game will be won on a last minute field goal. 60% it's the Pack doing the kicking, 40% it's the Hawks.

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

01/11/2008 01:28:38 PM · #254

Are you sure it wont end with Hasselbeck throwing a pick to Al Harris then returned for a TD... That can happen ya know!!!!

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Oh, I forgot to call this one too. Game will be won on a last minute field goal. 60% it's the Pack doing the kicking, 40% it's the Hawks.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

01/11/2008 01:29:06 PM · #255

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Oh, I forgot to call this one too. Game will be won on a last minute field goal. 60% it's the Pack doing the kicking, 40% it's the Hawks.

Nah... Game will be lost on a no-timeouts-left turnover by the trailing team with the clock running down...

R.

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 II

01/11/2008 01:29:19 PM · #256

Originally posted by Bugzeye:

Are you sure it wont end with Hasselbeck throwing a pick to Al Harris then returned for a TD... That can happen ya know!!!!

Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Oh, I forgot to call this one too. Game will be won on a last minute field goal. 60% it's the Pack doing the kicking, 40% it's the Hawks.

LOL. That would generate some press...

Maybe this time it's Trufant.

Message edited by author 2008-01-11 13:29:49.

superdave

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

01/11/2008 01:58:09 PM · #257

My grandma had knee surgery last week and I have been staying here trying to help her out. Tell ya what, she moves alot better then Alexander and she is using a cane. I was watching Farve this morning talk about how this could be his last game at the stadium. I hope it doesn't start getting to his head. I have seen some games when he throws interception after interception after interception after interception.

01/11/2008 02:09:55 PM · #258

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by LoudDog:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by LoudDog:
How did Seattle do against teams with losing records and statistically poor rushing defense?

Just as well as Green Bay. You would need to look at total rushing yards though because time is split between Alexander and Morris. Neither are going to have as many yards or attempts as Grant.

Having watched most of GB's and Seattle's games, GB's running game is clearly better right now. As bad as Seattle's running game has been this year, they were easily better then GB the first 7 games as saying GB was pathetic at rushing at that time was an overstatement. I don't think you'll find an expert that disagrees. I don't think you've watched grant play much??? Look up a news article on him. I'd love to see what would have happened had he been the starter from week #1 assuming he'd hold up all year and not get injured. His rushing total since week 8 (when he became starter) is second only to the NFL MVP LaDainian Tomlinson by only 18 yards!

Man, so now GB has a rusher equal to LaDanian? Man, I've been asleep and missed that one...

Removing the garbage games against the Falcons and Lions, the Packers have 881 yards rushing in your magical "last 9 games". The Seahawks have 804. Less. But not much. Both have played mainly pathetic rushing defenses (with a few exceptions: Baltimore, Arizona, Philadelphia on Seattle's side. Dallas and Minnesota on Green Bay's side). In case we worry that one team favored the pass more during those games, their passing yards are 2338 and 2369. Virtually identical.

The two teams are evenly matched with subtle nuances of difference. Sure, I'd give the running game edge to GB (mainly due to their OL rather than any qualities of their RB), but not by much and it certainly can't qualify as "LaDainian good". That's a complete crock.

I find it pompus that you knock Grant knowing so little about him. He is not proven enough to compare to LT, but his performance this season is easily comparable to LT.

And, if it's more the off line then grant, how come the first three backs the pack tried this season all sucked? Yet grant, a back up in college, is a star?

But if you want to play numbers, Despite not taking over as the Packers' top running back until the seventh game of the season, Grant had 11 runs of 20 yards or more - tying him with Minnesota's Adrian Peterson and Philadelphia's Brian Westbrook for third-most in the league. Grant also had four touchdown runs of 20 yards or more - tying him with Tomlinson and trailing only Peterson, with six. Now if he played 7 more games???

Or

Packers are 3rd in the NFL breaking a 10+ yard run on 27% of their attempts
Seattle is 30th in the NFL allowing a 10+ yard run on 24% of the opposing teamÃ¢€™s attempts. Pretty scary huh? Add that up and Grant should be busting a 10+ yard carry every four attempts.

Or

Realize that Seattle is a very aggressive defense and GB is a very deceptive offense. Bad combo for Seattle (stats don't really show that).

Or

Favre sacked 15 times, while attempting 535 passes this year, Hasselbeck sacked 33 times in 562 passes.
Packers #2 total offense behind only the Patriots, Seattle #9
Packers #2 in yards per play, Seattle #16.
Packers #4 in scoring, Seattle #9.
Packers #11 in yards per rush (although MUCH better the second half), Seattle #22
3rd down defense, Packers #3, Seattle #11
3rd down offense, Packers #8 Seattle #26
Game time temp will be in the 20Ã¢€™s, Brett FavreÃ¢€™s record in games below 34 degrees = 40-5
Brett FavreÃ¢€™s record in Lambeau Field = 72-13
What's Seattle's road record this year? Oh yeah, 3-5
Hasselbeck's road record?
Hasselbeck's record below 34 degrees?

GB 34 SEA 20 Only because SEA scores a meaningless touchdown at the end.
Grant gets 100+ yards including at least two long runs.
Seattle defense is so confused with GB's 5 receivers and Grant that the Packers off rolls at will.
Seattle gives up on the running game early.
Hasselbeck plays well but lots of dropped balls by receivers in the cold and just not well enough to win.
Electric waves from Josh Brown's pants tires his leg muscles and his kicking is miserable all game.

01/11/2008 02:12:20 PM · #259

news report i seen this morning said favre told his brother and a long time friend that he is planning on coming back next year.

Originally posted by superdave:

01/11/2008 02:22:39 PM · #260

I kind of agree, The 5 wide set is going to be hard for Seatle to control if they want to do alot of blitzing, Favre can dump the ball off pretty fast and when they are bringing 6-8 guys that will leave at least one if not 2 or 3 of those very dangerous wide recievers in man coverage or totally open. Favre will pick them apart all day if they try to rush him. And if they go out and cover those dangerous wide outs, Ryan Grant is going to have a career day.

01/11/2008 02:47:56 PM · #261

Well, like I said before, we're all dorks sitting in front of the computer. :) Conversations like this are passionate and fun though. It will be a good game and I'll toast you if you win. If the Hawks lose, personally I hope its a blowout because I don't know if I can take a close defeat.

I firmly believe RB is the easiest position to fill in the NFL. Why did GB suddenly get better with Grant? Didn't the GB OL have injury trouble this year? I don't know if it's true, but did they get someone back on the OL about that time?

Look at Shaun. He goes from the NFL MVP to an average back in a few years. Why? Steve Hutchinson. In 2005 Seattle had one of the all-time dominant left sides on the offensive line. Everybody KNEW Seattle was running left. Everybody's grandma knew. The janitor knew. Did it matter? Absolutely not. TD Shaun.

Strangely enough, Hutchinson moves to Minnesota. Is it a coincidence that the next golden child happens to come from Minnesota?

01/11/2008 03:28:31 PM · #262

Different backs perform differently behind different blockers and in different offenses. Some backs are actually better with poor blocking (Barry Sanders). I would not call it the easiest position, but understand what you are saying.

I don't recall injury problems on the line. He started the 2nd half against Denver, got over 100 yards that half and has been on fire since then. Grant makes good decisions, sees the play develop really well, and has breakaway speed. He is taller then a normal back, maybe that helps him see the play develop? He looks like the real deal, we'll see how he does in the playoffs and next year now that he's not flying under the radar.

I hadn't watched Alexander much in years past, but this year it looks like he runs expecting to break tackles, and doesn't. Maybe his head got too big and he just thinks he can run over and through people? Maybe he lost a little? Maybe defenses figured out how to stop him?

01/11/2008 03:35:42 PM · #263

Part of the reason GB sucked at running at start of the season was. The packers dumped their entire backfield Green Davenport, Morency was supposed to be the starter but got injured right out of the gates. which left us with a second string back with hardly any knowlege of the system to fill his shoes. I think Grant studied the playbook for the first weeks and when his turn came he made the best of it.

plus the passing game was very effective so they used it more which didn't really give the backs anymore experience other than blocking assignments.

Message edited by author 2008-01-11 15:36:54.

Canon EF-M 22mm f/2.0 STM Lens

01/11/2008 03:35:42 PM · #264

This is what made me think perhaps the OL was different in the beginning...

Packers get healthy on the O-line

smardaz

01/11/2008 04:10:45 PM · #265

Well I have officially reached the saturation point with this conversation and the back and forth stats. And some of these predictions of how the game will be won are so detailed as to be laughable. Any given Sunday anything can happen. A botched fg snap, an OT intereception for a runback, maybe even a marching band on the field. The truth none of us really have a clue.
Bring on the game please, just bring on the game, and may the best team win.

Spork99

Canon EOS M6 Mk II

01/11/2008 04:12:34 PM · #266

Seattle, Green Bay, who cares? The best either team can hope for is second place to the Pats.

smardaz

01/11/2008 04:17:57 PM · #267

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

Seattle, Green Bay, who cares? The best either team can hope for is second place to the Pats.

fine with me, i love when the powerhouses overlook every team while eyeing the prize, many times they get humbled like my Sonics going out to the Nuggets..

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

01/11/2008 04:31:51 PM · #268

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

This is what made me think perhaps the OL was different in the beginning...

Packers get healthy on the O-line

There had been some shuffling around, but nothing significant enough to cause the running game to go from suck caliber to probowl caliber.

genghis

Canon PowerShot Pro1

01/11/2008 04:42:50 PM · #269

Originally posted by LoudDog:
Some backs are actually better with poor blocking (Barry Sanders).

Do you really mean this???

Sanders was dropped for a loss more times than any other back in history.

Reason: poor blocking.

With quality blocking, he would have easily won the rushing title every year, along with outgaining Emmit Smith for all time yards. (and I'm a Cowboy fan)

strangeghost

Canon EOS-7D

01/11/2008 05:30:20 PM · #270

Thank god this game is less than 24 hours away. I need some FOOTBALL!

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

01/11/2008 07:57:41 PM · #271

After that Bears season I can only imagine how bad you need it. lol

Originally posted by strangeghost:

Thank god this game is less than 24 hours away. I need some FOOTBALL!

strangeghost

Canon EOS-7D

01/11/2008 08:04:01 PM · #272

Nice try Bugz. The season is OVER. I've MOVED on. I'm OVER it. It's not a BIG deal.

yanko

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Carl Zeiss 50mm ZE f/1.4 Planar T for Canon

01/11/2008 08:52:17 PM · #273

Originally posted by genghis:

Sanders would have broken the rushing title anyway had he not abruptly retired. Anyway, what I think LoudDog is getting at is all running backs are different. Poor blocking is a relative term. For a running back that hits the hole quick he doesn't need the blockers to block for very long before he's through the hole. Put in a running back that likes to dance around a bit or otherwise hesitant and that same OL may not perform as well.

Message edited by author 2008-01-11 21:15:49.

01/11/2008 09:04:22 PM · #274

Originally posted by genghis:

And with all the drops for a loss, in just 10 years of playing he is the 3rd leading rusher in NFL history and averaged 5 yards per carry. I heard him in an interview once where he said he did not like set run plays or his blockers making designed holes. He was asked if he'd rather have Dallas's line (they were the best back then) and he said he didn't think he'd do as well. Maybe he was just being nice to his line, but I can see with his pinball style of running that he'd do better in chaos then hitting a set hole where the defense knows where he's going.

Some guys just seem to do better when they have to create on their own rather then having a 3-5 yard hole made for them to get 3-5 yards at a time. If you watch Ryan Grant run (or any other slasher runner), notice that almost all his long runs are from cut backs when he deviates from the hole the blockers make for him. With bad blockers one could argue that those cut back opportunities would be more frequent. Maybe not. Just a theory.