Should Packers Pass on Running the Ball?

Written by Mike Davidsen Monday, 23 August 2010 20:20

    Something stood out on the Packers’ first two offensive drives during Saturday’s night game versus the Seahawks: the Packers were going awfully pass-heavy. The result? Two routine scoring drives that both resulted in touchdowns. Now, Seattle’s pass defense is nothing special, but the Packers’ offense made it look like they could have done it in their sleep.

    With a healthy and stable offensive line, there’s no reason why Mike McCarthy shouldn’t have experimented with this approach. It’s no secret that Aaron Rodgers is playing at MVP level and Jermichael Finley’s game is headed toward greatness. Should the Packers make like the 2009 Colts and abandon the running game?

   Ideally a team would like its offense to be as balanced as possible, for the purpose of limiting their predictability to defenses as well as being able to perform in any weather conditions. Over the past season, we’ve seen Mike McCarthy constantly emphasize the running unit, just to have the passing game bail them out on third downs. In an earlier post (Four Reasons Why Opposing Defenses Should be Scared), I had labeled a consistent running game as one of four keys to a successful offense this season. While I’m still an advocate of a sound running game, it only makes sense to run an offense that maximizes its strengths.

    Perhaps the solution is to “open up with the pass and close with the run”. We’ve seen the Packers have success only through the air many times before, like in last year’s playoff loss to the Cardinals. Instead of searching a balance in the play-calling early on, the offense could work in passing mode for the first three quarters of a game and then turn it over to Ryan Grant and Brandon Jackson if the Packers have the lead.

    Increasing the percentage of passing plays has its risks, but ones that the Packers especially can combat. The offensive line will definitely be counted on to protect Aaron Rodgers, the centerpiece of this offense. A lot of trust will be put in Rodgers here, as he’ll be expected to not abuse the extra touches by making dangerous throws. Knowing his concern for taking care of the football, this shouldn’t be a problem.   

    The downside to this proposal can be summed up in one historic playoff game: the 2007 NFC Championship loss to the Giants in zero-degree temperatures. As I explained in an earlier post, Lambeau Field is not a good match for a one-dimensional offense lacking a ground game. Given that the Packers will almost surely have to win a home playoff game to get to the Super Bowl, they’ll have to hope that the running game is solid enough to carry the team if they are forced to play in conditions that make it difficult to pass.

    If the pass-heavy approach does, in fact, prove to be a huge catalyst for the offense, the team could see more scores on opening drives, and more opportunities to pull away in games. The approach is not radically different from how the offense ran in 2009; it just allows for the Packers’ best player to do more with the football. Why dedicate downs to running the ball when the better approach could just be complimenting the passing game with off tackle runs and draw plays? With a consistent offensive line, loads of weapons at receiver and a pro bowl-caliber quarterback, the pass-heavy offense could be just what the 2010 Packers need to put games out of reach.

Written by :

gbpackersone