Green and Bold: Half and Half
One of the most frustrating aspects of watching the Green Bay Packers flounder during the 2016 season is the fact that it doesn't always seem like it has to be this way.
By mnbruton
One of the most frustrating aspects of watching the Green Bay Packers flounder during the 2016 season is the fact that it doesn't always seem like it has to be this way.
In multiple games, the Packers have been plagued by an inability to get into the end zone in the second half of games.
Though they rank fifth in the league this season in first-half scoring, averaging 14.8 points per TeamRankings.com, the Packers' ranking falls to 22nd in second-half points scored on average, with only 9.9.
This trend hasn't necessarily been the case over Green Bay's last three games.
In those games (against Indianapolis, Tennessee, and Washington), we've seen the Packers plagued by slow starts, putting up 12 points in the first half on average, though their average for the season is 14.8.
However, they've come back to show signs of life in the second half, scoring 13 points over those three games even though their season average is just 9.9.
That, however, has proved to be incredibly frustrating to watch.
Seeing Aaron Rodgers orchestrate back-to-back scoring drives less than two minutes apart in the fourth quarter against Washington, including a streak of going 4-of-4 for 67 yards to hit three different receivers, suggests that the Packers should be able do that earlier and more frequently than they do this season.
It's no surprise that the best teams in the league this season are playing consistent football in the first and second halves of games. The Atlanta Falcons are scoring 15.9 points on average in the first half this season and 16.1 points in the second half. That, no surprise, ranks at the top of the league in both categories.
Of course, lots of factors go into scoring statistics, including whether the team in question is leading during the entire game or playing from behind, and how that affects its play selection and decision to go for the end zone versus running time off the clock.
But there's a clear difference between the teams that can get into the end zone with consistent regularity...and teams like the Packers that seem to stumble into it on accident occasionally.
As NFL Network's Ben Fennell pointed out back in October, at one point the Packers were the worst second-half team in the NFL (early bye week notwithstanding), though they were fourth in scoring in the first half.
The Packers have struggled in the second half before during Mike McCarthy's tenure. In 2014, they were 18th in that category, scoring just 11 points in the third and fourth quarter despite ranking first in the league in the first half with 18.7 points on average that season.
McCarthy's Packers "taking their foot off the gas" is a familiar trope in Green Bay. It just hasn't threatened to keep them out of the playoffs before now.
Comments (47)
Hematite
November 23, 2016 at 06:16 am
Mike McCarthy outsmarts himself and his team by going away from what's working.
NashvilleCheesehead
November 23, 2016 at 06:22 am
And how about our defense?!?!?! According to teamranking.com we are 20th in second half defense and 30th in first half defense points allowed. That's right, we give up the third highest point per game in the first half AND THEN take our foot off the gas on offense in the second half. Brilliant....simply brilliant. Total regime change!!!
NickPerry
November 23, 2016 at 06:49 am
Wow, way to go Michelle. I didn't think the Packers ranked in the Top 5 anywhere! They've been hard to watch in the first half or 2nd, the 1st quarter of the 4th, it doesn't seem to matter. Sunday Night for example the Packers had fought back and were down by 5 I believe it was. I went to the restroom and when I came back out the Redskins were kicking off!! WTF happened??? They've been decimated by injuries EVERYWHERE but I honestly believe if healthy it wouldn't make that big of difference.
Even in the first 6 games last year going 6-0 something seemed just a little off. We or I attributed to the Offense just not being quite in sync. Then Denver happened and this team has never been the same, 20 games ago and counting.
The Packers don't score a lot anymore because they lack consistently, playmakers, explosiveness, creativity, any running game, and have Don Barclay!
RCPackerFan
November 23, 2016 at 06:55 am
I really wonder these last 2 games if they would have been different if the Packers score on their first drives?
Against the Titans, they recovered an onside kick on the opening kick. They go 3 and out. If that drive they go down and score a TD. Does that change the game? Maybe, maybe not. But that would have given them a ton of momentum. Instead they go 3 and out, the defense then gives up a long TD on the first play and they essentially lost the game after that.
Against the Redskins, they had 3 drives where they went 3 and out. If they score on any of those drives does it change the game?
Obviously we don't know what would have happened in those games, but if they get started a lot faster, get a lead, maybe that would change the outcome of these games.
Tundraboy
November 23, 2016 at 08:08 am
That's what pisses me off the most. One would think after some losses and for all the talk, they would come out with some pride and be aggressive. We just run the stupid script and leave it at that. Forget about keeping the foot on the pedal how about flooring it first, maybe jump on the other team first. Especially at home.
RCPackerFan
November 23, 2016 at 08:19 am
Whatever reason Rodgers has started very slowly these first few games. Once he has gotten into a rhythm the offense seems to move the ball really well..
They have to figure out how to get Rodgers into a rhythm faster.
Point-Packer
November 23, 2016 at 10:51 am
On the first three and out drive against the Titans they inexplicably ran Starks up the gut on the first two plays to set up an obvious 3rd and 6 passing down. Packers don't convert. Way to go Mike
RCPackerFan
November 23, 2016 at 05:26 pm
Not that it really matters to much but I thought they were in a 3rd and 3 on that play.
Regardless, its kind of like the red zone. I would rather give Rodgers 2 chances throwing versus just giving him 1 chance to complete the first down.
Tundraboy
November 23, 2016 at 07:57 pm
Exactly my point. Script has devolved into some combination of run, run pass or run go deep to sideline, run etc. My favorite is the run up the middle into a wall the first two downs and then a swing pass to the side for little gain or loss.
RCPackerFan
November 23, 2016 at 07:31 am
I do believe your correct.
The offense has been playing from behind in almost all of these losses.
If they can get out to a bigger lead for once, it might change these games.
Can't blame the defense for everything, because the offense has failed also.
Tundraboy
November 23, 2016 at 08:10 am
Sad but true. See my post above.
Since'61
November 23, 2016 at 07:18 am
It's a little difficult to judge the Packers offense given the state of their running game. To me, one of the basic problems is that even when healthy the Packers do not have any players who are a threat to breakaway and score from anywhere on the field unless there is a broken coverage as we saw on the pass to Starks which went for a TD. Lacy when healthy is too slow to break away as is Starks. Jordy, Cobb and Nelson do not possess game breaker speed. R. Rodgers can be covered by an NT. Cook maybe if he gets behind a safety can go all the way. Our best chance is Monty as we saw on the draw play against the Colts a few weeks ago but for some reason he sees limited snaps. Our other chance might be Trevor Davis but he does not appear to be ready to play consistently. Janis is a bad play waiting to happen. Defenses know that our running game cannot hurt them. They sit on the pass and disrupt the timing of our routes. Maybe with Cook and hopefully Monty having larger roles in the offense we can open things up. But right now we're one dimensional and once defenses adjust during halftime, especially if we are behind, they pretty much know that it's all on A. Rodgers. In the meantime our defense is giving up easy TDs on almost every possession. 6 TDs in each of the last 2 games is just bad football, unacceptable. And we need to hold our breath during every Special Teams play, especially the kick and punt coverage units. Right now our passing game and our run defense are the only phases of the team that are functioning effectively. With the injuries to Ryan and Martinez the run defense may be the next part of the team to disintegrate, which means the defense may be even worse if that's possible. Basically, every game is a playoff game for the Packers. We'll see how or if they respond. Thanks, Since '61
Since'61
November 23, 2016 at 10:24 am
Maybe, I hope that you're correct. Thanks, Since '61
MarkinMadison
November 23, 2016 at 03:05 pm
All of our hopes are now resting on a RB who is so awesome, he was cut.
Tundraboy
November 23, 2016 at 07:58 pm
Is that really you Cow???
RCPackerFan
November 23, 2016 at 07:44 am
I like the game that McCarthy called against Washington. I felt that he mixed and matched personnel very well, and he used the right players for the most part. Though I would like to see Davis get some snaps (for his speed) and Montgomery get used a lot more.
The Washington game it was more on the players not making plays. Adams had a couple of drops, Starks had a bad drop, Rodgers missed a few throws. Bad timing penalty's have killed the offense.
Moving forward I think the offense has to feature Cook and Montgomery a lot more. Also, find a way to hit Cobb on the slant pass. He is a player that fights for extra yards. All the WR's have been good after the catch. Need to run more routes where they can make plays after the catch.
And also Rodgers needs to try and find Cook and Nelson down the field more. Both have gotten open deep and Rodgers didn't find them.
Tundraboy
November 23, 2016 at 08:14 am
You said it RC.
dobber
November 23, 2016 at 08:44 am
That's a lot of passes to spread around...
But going back to the bye, ARod has thrown fewer than 40 passes in only one of his last 7, so, hey, there's plenty. And it's not likely to change.
RCPackerFan
November 23, 2016 at 09:05 am
Not really. If they are throwing 40 passes a game they could target their top 4 WR's about 6 times each. Leaving the rest to be targeted 2-3 times each.
Since'61
November 23, 2016 at 10:30 am
RC - I agree with your points but we can't win unless our defense begins to play better. The last 2 games have been like practices for our opponents offense. Thanks, Since '61
RCPackerFan
November 23, 2016 at 11:09 am
I agree.
At the same time the offense has to be more consistent. I'm not taking away that the Defense has to play better. Just saying that if the offense plays better faster, does it change the games at all?
Against Washington they only scored 10 points the first 3 quarters. If they score more points early does it change the way the games are being played?
Since'61
November 23, 2016 at 12:40 pm
RC - that's hard to say. We did take the lead in the 2Q. That's when we needed the defense to step up. Instead they allowed the Redskins to run out the half and score a TD, giving the lead back to the 'Skins at the half. Then the defense stops the 'Skins on their opening second half possession but Daniels take a dumb penalty, the "Skins drive continues and they add an FG. The Packers take the following KO drive the field and miss an FG. If we get off the field rather than the penalty and our offense drives the field we're in an even game or maybe we even take the lead. The point being we're not good enough to overcome mistakes and bad plays. And since the collapse in Seattle in the NFCG we don't respond well to adversity. This team was very resilient prior to that game. Since then they fall apart at crunch time. Thanks, Since '61
RCPackerFan
November 23, 2016 at 05:30 pm
We did take the lead, but I think we lost some momentum when we had to settle for a FG. If we would have scored a TD I believe that would have given us more momentum.
No right now they have not been good enough to overcome their mistakes.
Thats why if they find rhythm earlier and capitalize on their plays earlier in games and play more consistently it will greatly improve things.
Since'61
November 23, 2016 at 07:37 pm
Agreed! If they can get some rhythm going early it could make a big difference. They are up against it now and they will really need a fast start in Philly on Monday. Thanks, Since '61
croatpackfan
November 23, 2016 at 08:02 am
Since, you said: " Jordy, Cobb and Nelson do not possess game breaker speed." Well I see Cobb and Nelson during game. They have some good influence, even scoring TDs. But that Jordy! He is invisible guy. No strange that Packers O is not functioning. They are one man less on the field...
;)
RCPackerFan
November 23, 2016 at 08:23 am
Nelson may not be 2014 version yet, but he has gotten open deep. Either Rodgers has missed him on throws or didn't see him. Nelson has gotten open though.
Cobb has been terrific with run after the catch. He is playing with determination that is much needed. He may not have deep speed, but if you get him the ball (on a slant) or where he can run after the catch, he can make big plays. They need to find ways to get him the ball where he can run after the catch.
The offense I feel is close, they just haven't been consistent. They find consistency and we will see them take off.
croatpackfan
November 23, 2016 at 09:04 am
RC read again - JORDY, Cobb and NELSON.... ;)))
RCPackerFan
November 23, 2016 at 09:13 am
lol, I know... I was just going off the 'do not possess game breaker speed.' comment..
Since'61
November 23, 2016 at 12:45 pm
RC - when I speak about game breakers I'm referring to Odell Beckham Junior, AJ Green and Antonio Brown types. Those guys can score from anywhere on the field, not just because they get separation but because they can run away from people even on a short pass reception. Maybe Monty can break a tackle or two and then out run people, but he's about it right now. Thanks, Since '61
RCPackerFan
November 23, 2016 at 05:35 pm
I get that.
But the truth is the Packers have players that can make those plays. They have just missed on them.
Just in this game there were about 2-3 passes that if Rodgers finds the receiver its a TD. Cook was open deep on the first play of the game. (easy TD). Nelson got open later.
Other big plays they have missed on this year. 2-3 that Rodgers miss threw to Nelson. Janis drops a deep throw, and there were others.
Davis has the speed to get deep. Montgomery and Cobb can take the ball and go 40 yards. Adams has shown he can run after the catch. Cook maybe our biggest weapon.
Since'61
November 23, 2016 at 07:39 pm
Agree! Monty and Cobb are the best chances we have for big plays. I hope that MM continues to keep them involved in the offense. Thanks, Since '61
Tundraboy
November 23, 2016 at 08:13 am
"Our best chance is Monty as we saw on the draw play against the Colts a few weeks ago but for some reason he sees limited snaps."
Last game as well. Why? Seems obvious to me that our best weapons now are Monty and Cook. Let's start with that and see if things loosen up for the slow guys.
dobber
November 23, 2016 at 08:37 am
" To me, one of the basic problems is that even when healthy the Packers do not have any players who are a threat to breakaway and score from anywhere on the field "
If you average 10 plays on a drive to put the ball in the endzone, you're far more likely to have a drive bog down than a team that only averages 6-8 plays to score. This is not a big-play offense, and when you're not a big-play offense you need to execute so much better to put points on the board than a team that gets big plays on a routine basis.
"With the injuries to Ryan and Martinez the run defense may be the next part of the team to disintegrate"
The Packers are at a stage (actually have been at a stage for some time) where they need to figure out who their best 11 defenders are that are still mobile and put them on the field. Are they better off with Bradford and Thomas inside and CMIII outside or are they better off with Thomas/Bradford and CMIII inside and a hodgepodge of Fackrell/Peppers/Elliott on the outside? They need to stop thinking situations and need to start thinking players. I think the answer is clear...we'll see what the Packers think.
Tundraboy
November 23, 2016 at 09:31 am
They need to stop thinking situations and need to start thinking players. I think the answer is clear...we'll see what the Packers think."
Excellent, Excellent point. Similar thinking to how they approach the start of games. They almost always run a script per MM. And any surprises are after they see how game flows. Stop thinking and start game with some bold plays, get Rodgers in flow. Script while somewhat varied is so predictable or so vanilla it's almost always 3 and out.
TKWorldWide
November 23, 2016 at 09:58 am
And what would these "bold plays" be?
Tundraboy
November 23, 2016 at 08:02 pm
Just about anything besides the same tired run plays up the middle, RRodgers in the flat, deep throws up the sideline on 3rd and short.
The 3 and out specials.
TKWorldWide
November 24, 2016 at 12:51 pm
If those interior runs gain yards, that's great. But it's not fair to wait until after they get stuffed and then declare "what a crappy playcall"
Those flat passes to RR have got to be checkdowns when nothing is open downfield. Hard to imagine GB prioritizes that play.
The only ones I REALLY hate are the long throws on third and short.
However, I am hypocritical enough to admit that when they connect on a 30 yarder on third and short I either keep my yapper shut or even applaud the "boldness".
To me it's all about results. Playcalls that work are praised as "brilliant", "well designed", "bold", "aggressive", etc. whereas plays that get stuffed or fall incomplete are "predictable", "tired", etc
But the difference is hindsight. MM does not know the outcome of a play before it unfolds, but criticism has the benefit of hindsight. That's why I very, very seldom complain about playcalling.
Tundraboy
November 24, 2016 at 10:28 pm
I see your point but the majority this year have been ones that don't work. Why keep it up expecting different results.
TKWorldWide
November 25, 2016 at 10:24 am
I know.
Everybody hates plays that don't work, but I don't think MM's giant laminated sheet has the headings "Plays that suck" and "plays that will work".
On a slightly more serious note, though, maybe some of the early plays are intended to set up plays for later, like a slant early sets up the slant and go later, or a down and out early sets up the out and up for later.
Maybe?
RCPackerFan
November 23, 2016 at 09:45 am
'Are they better off with Bradford and Thomas inside and CMIII outside or are they better off with Thomas/Bradford and CMIII inside and a hodgepodge of Fackrell/Peppers/Elliott on the outside?'
Shouldn't the question be, who is better. Perry, Peppers/Jones/Elliott/Fackrell at OLB or Bradford, Thomas at ILB?
Because if you put Mathews at OLB then you have Bradford and Thomas at ILB. If you put Mathews at ILB then you have the combination of Peppers/Jones/Elliott/Fackrell at OLB.
At ILB Mathews improves the OLB's IMO. OL have to account for Mathews rushing from the middle or where ever, where they have to slide their protections inside. Also the QB has to account for him rushing up the middle which may cause delay in his throwing the ball which allows the OLB's that split second longer to get to the QB.
Personally I think moving Mathews to the ILB will improve the defense greatly if they use him like they did against the Bears in his first game there. If they try to make him an ILB like last year, it won't improve the defense. Mathews is a special and needs to be used in what he is best at. If you put him at ILB and have him drop into coverage and don't have him blitzing, it really takes away his effectiveness.
Would they ask Troy Polamalu to sit back and cover deep passes all game? No, they allowed him to attack and play everywhere. Mathews needs to be used like that.
dobber
November 23, 2016 at 11:03 am
I think we're asking the same question, but you did it better.
Razer
November 23, 2016 at 08:23 am
Not a big stats guy so I don't really know what Michelle hopes to reveal. Bad and decimated defense aside, the offense has not really been a difference maker in either half. Too many 3 and outs, too many lapses in production and too many put the defense back out on the field.
Rodgers and company need to score early and score often. We need to dictate the tempo and strategy of the game and that won't happen with an offense that disappears for stretches. Hopefully Christine Michael will help because the offense needs to carry this team. We are healthy enough and talented enough on offense to make this happen. All aboard.
Handsback
November 23, 2016 at 08:25 am
Green Bay with all their issues are still enjoyable to watch. During the 70-80 I never got to see them play. Because of their previous success, I get to see them almost every week. Now my expectations have not been met on how they are playing. I know people who post on this board are not going to like what I write, but here goes....
You can point to coaching all day long and this team comes up short. I think the main issue isn't the coaching, but the player leadership. Starting with Aaron Rodgers, who is probably the most talented QB that has ever worn the Packer's uniform.
The players are young, confused and floundering. Coaches are trying to get them focused, but it's not working. The reason is for this young team, there's not enough player leadership keeping them focused and making them accountable. Reading after game accounts and opinions is all I can do since I'm not in the locker room. (All of us are in the same boat.) To me the difference between the Packers that won the SB and teams since is player leadership. A player is more concerned of making his teammate mad vs. his coach. If his teammate doesn't have high enough expectations, then the player's next level of concern is the coach. The leadership and mindset that should come from the QB isn't happening in Green Bay. There's no Woodson on the defensive side. Daniels is emotional, but players seem to be tired of his rants.
The three guys who should be the leaders; Rodgers, Matthews, and Peppers are not stepping up and performing that role. I'm only guessing here because again I'm not in the locker room, but what I'm reading.
As an example, the Cowboys are doing great with a rookie QB. I've tried to figure out why and it occurred to me and others that the Cowboys had enough talent if used properly, but lacked a true field leader. Tony Romo is a very good QB, but he's no leader. Prescott is a rookie, but has added a dimension that Romo never did and the older players are blending with the rookies to make sure they play as a team. There are articles everyday about how the Cowboys are playing as a team and holding one another accountable. That never happened when Romo was the starter.
The Seahawks are another example. They don't have that good of an offense since their Oline is terrible, but their team leadership just holds everyone accountable.
After the SB win there has been a lot of criticism of Rodgers being a 4th qtr finisher. I thought it was a lame argument. I think the issue is when you have a QB that is as talented as Rodgers, he raises the team in those high profile games. The QB is at his best when the team needs it the most. That hasn't happened for Rodgers since that SB year. For the QBs like Starr and now Brady...they make the team better. They expect the team to be better, and their teammates don't want to be the guy who blows that key assignment. Do you think the Packers would be this bad with Brady? Remember he doesn't have nearly the physical traits of Rodgers.
To me that is the problem with this year's Packers. They are young and injured and you can't deny that nor can you fix it so late in the year. The issue of not being accountable to each other is a problem that is going to linger for some time.
(Sorry for the long post. Just finished my second book and can't seem to write short comments.)
dobber
November 23, 2016 at 08:52 am
Not to be too MM-ish on these things, but the Doughboys and Seahawks have more guys playing at a high level (and winning their one-on-ones), but on opposite sides of the ball.
Seattle's OL is awful, but they score enough points to win because their defense gives them the ball with good field position often enough that they don't need to sustain long drives where the OL can buckle and shoot them down. With Wilson healthy and Rawls back, they're better now than they've been all season. Dallas is a team that's built to sustain long drives and it's all on that OL. It helps to have a QB who is staying healthy and a coach that now understands that he needs to put the game in the hands of his OL (and RB) and not his QB.
dobber
November 23, 2016 at 08:40 am
"In those games (against Indianapolis, Tennessee, and Washington), we've seen the Packers plagued by slow starts, putting up 12 points in the first half on average, though their average for the season is 14.8.
However, they've come back to show signs of life in the second half, scoring 13 points over those three games even though their season average is just 9.9."
So what you're really saying is that the Packers are essentially still scoring about 25 points per game, but they're distributing them differently? I don't care how they distribute points so long as they can find a way to win.
RCPackerFan
November 23, 2016 at 11:35 am
Really they need to find a way to keep scoring. they need more possessions ending in points vs punts. But at the same time they really need to keep winning the field position battle when they aren't scoring points.
Their first 3 possessions on offense they went 3 and out in each. Not only did that affect their offense, but it gave the Redskins a shorter field each time. Which then they got a TD. It put the defense in a bad spot allowing little room for error.
They need to stop these long stretches of not scoring. The inconsistency of the offense is really hurting.
Against the Falcons they scored 24 points in the first half. 8 in the second. If they come away with points in any of their drives in the 2nd half they likely win that game.
mcduff67
November 23, 2016 at 08:46 am
McCarthy has burned out, Ted Thomson should retire, ARod needs to get hitched & do film. It's a bad scene maybe next year a new look?