Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Packers against QBs that can run

Verge

By Verge,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

Verge Veteran

Verge

Posted
Posted

So far this year, they have faced three quarterbacks with running abilities, they have struggled mightily and clearly do not have someone on the defense that can spy.

 

Three running quarterbacks:

26 carries, 168 yards, 6.4 YPC.

Cam and Mike Shula are most likely licking their chops watching the tape.

 

Not to mention, the last three games versus the running attack in general, it looks like this:

90 carries, 409 yards, 4.5 yards a carry. If you take away a terrible Chargers running attack it looks a lot better. We should be running on them all game long.

 

They are also one of the worst teams in covering good receiving tight ends, they haven't been able to contain them all season long. This matchup is very good for us and we can win it if we avoid turnovers and keep A-Rod on edge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lightsout Grand Master

lightsout

Posted
Posted

I said it earlier in the week. Win the turnover battle, control TOP, and pressure Rodgers, we win.

Also, expect Cam to go off in a big way. I'm expecting an absolutely terrific day for him, barring dropped passes plaguing us. Just a gut feeling, no real rhyme or reason. I'm not at all worried for us defensively, I think we'll survive just fine on that front and be able to contain their offense so long as the offense keeps our defense off of the field for extended periods of time. If we can average 5 minute drives this game, man that'd be huge. That's assuming we get about 2.5 possessions per quarter. With GB not having the greatest rushing attack, we may get 3-4 possessions per quarter even. If that happens, that means our defense is getting 3 and outs consistently throughout the game, which means we have to maximize our possessions and get points. Get 2 TDs up and I am fine with field goals, because our defense is going to play out of it's mind this game. Gotta think they have a bad taste in their mouth with Luck moving the ball like he did in the 4th and OT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
USCGuardsman Newbie

USCGuardsman

Posted
Posted

The game plan really does need to be "run the damn ball", but I will lose my facilities if they come out and just continue to run three straight up the gut and out in three. Yes, you need to run the dive to keep them honest, they just could use a little more creativity in how they call the counters, tosses and draws. I remember when Stew and Williams both rushed for over 1K, it was because they were able to pop it outside and take advantage of the over pursuit from the DE. With that said, I know that DE's are a lot less likely to over pursue with Cam and his running ability, but there has to be a way to create opportunities on the edge. I also know Stew is a power runner, but he does have good speed and vision. Just babbling.... Don't mind me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • outlaw4
      That's it. How do you feel about this draft class.

      By outlaw4 · Posted

      Not one single pick that is asking me why we drafted a guy in the first place. It was a guy we needed and/or a guy that had certain traits making them stand out. Best of all, I feel everyone we drafted are capable of stepping onto the field this year and have a meaningful role (even Kuwatch on special teams). Obviously, nothing is guaranteed but I'm not seeing any huge flags on guys because they're risky projects or massive overreaches.
    • MHS831
      A look at the team after the draft and udfa signings...

      By MHS831 · Posted

      Here is how Morgan is strategic-He re-signs Scott because he was not going S in round 1--he had the chance, and he did not.  He saw the top of the draft at T and knew none of them would be ready to start day 1, so he signs a veteran to a one-year deal, giving his tackle selection a chance to learn and prepare for what might be LT or RT.  Those two moves suggested, perhaps ironically because they contradict each other, what he was going to do, based on the talent pool.  He never brought in a Robinson replacement at DE/NT, and then moves up to draft one.   I almost wonder if the intent was to draft DT/DE all along at some point, maybe with a trade back, but then Freeling dropped to them.   Of course, we felt that they were looking WR, and wonder if the plan was to draft a WR in round 2 if you traded back in round 1.  However, when Freeling was there, the trade back fell apart.  Then we traded up for Hunter.  We could stick with XL and hope Metchie steps up, so we sat still in round three and took Brazell II, a 1000 yard speedster and perfect Z WR.  What a break. At that time, CB and Center were our biggest needs, and with several possible centers on the board and a good fit for our defense at CB, we grabbed Will Lee III.  Lee and Thornton have people in front of them, but I think Morgan knew we needed a guy who can play the outside and press--and probably step in as Jackson's replacement in 2027.    After making trades to get back into the fifth round, where we grabbed one of the best centers in the draft.  This is significant because we signed Fortner to a one-year deal; maybe Morgan saw what some of us saw--the center position is strong in this draft--on day 3, and day 3 players need a year, in most cases.  Moments later, a safety they had been talking to whose skill set matched what we are looking for in a FS.  As stated, Scott was signed,  but the fact that the Panthers were talking to Wheatley and not Theiemann means that they might have known they were not going FS early, but would need a developmental FS later--which explains why we signed Scott.  So if you pay attention to the one-year, vet deals, you can tell where we planned to sign later-round, developmental players.  What positions did we draft early that did not have 1-year veterans signed in front of them:  DL (Hunter) and WR (I don't count Metchie because I count starting-level players). I would not be surprised to learn later that the plan was DT and WR in rounds 1 and 2--then Freeling fell.  Notice that Freeling--from Mt Pleasant SC, did not come in for a visit.  Most of the other OT candidates had short arms or were certain to be gone. I don't think Freeling was in their plans.  I think a trade back and Hunter and maybe Boston was the vision.  I am guessing that CB was also high on their list.   So in this draft, we got 
    • frankw
      OFFICIAL 2026 Undrafted Free Agent Thread

      By frankw · Posted

      This is one area I think that is not getting enough exposure in the midst of all the optimism. I like Chuba a great deal from a personal standpoint but he has largely proven nothing on a consistent basis yet. He's had the one season of production but before that most people pegged us as moving on. And last year injuries or not he just did not have that juice. The rest of the guys are completely unproven. I don't see anyone among the group having a game or a handful of games worth of high level production the way Rico Dowdle did last year. And yeah he dropped off and yeah he got an attitude about our incompetent handling of the touches which was honestly justified on his part and he moved on but he did legitimately save our season. That's what it is going to take to seize control of the NFC South. We all know that we will not be passing all over defenses. It is what it is. So who amongst this RB group is capable of doing that? And if we are struggling to run the ball AND pass are we going to revert to making excuses for our coach and QB again? That is definitely getting old.
×
×
  • Create New...