On To Green Bay

[Jarntt]

I don't see much difference between Parnell and Free overall. Free gets a little more push and Parnell seems a little better against some quicker pass rushers. I dont want to jinx it, but My biggest concern is that if Free is playing and we have an injury we still have Parnell. What if we lose a Tackle with Free already out? Don't see Martin bouncing out, so it could be ugly.

[PDay8810]

I think most teams struggle if 2 of their top 3 tackles go down
Kiss Dallas good bye if they have health issues or turn the football over multiple times

[bluejerseyjinx]

To me....Rodgers remains the best QB in pro football. He will have his success. We have to make sure the run efforts become minimal as the game goes on by plugging the gaps to allow LB's to run to the football. Better to have Rodgers become one dimensional. Lacy is the key to me. Thankfully GB seldom involves the TE. Their wides will have their moments, that's a given, but Lacy becomes the real key here.

Yes we gotta pound....BUT he also need to throw the football DOWN the field on play action.
Screen will also be huge this week.

GO COWBOYS!

I think we can pound the ball right down Green Bay's throat. Personally I'd give Murray 25 carries and hopefully give Randle and Dunbar another 15 touches. Keep Rodger's off the field with long, sustained drives. Let him play catch up till he tears his calf muscle again. I have a feeling Rodger's won't last the game anyway.

[Jarntt]

I think most teams struggle if 2 of their top 3 tackles go down
Kiss Dallas good bye if they have health issues or turn the football over multiple times

Yes on the injuries which is why I brought it up. If Free is back we aren't going to lose 2 of our top 3 tackles in one game, but if Free is already out there is obviously a much better chance of that happening.

[Jarntt]

To me....Rodgers remains the best QB in pro football. He will have his success. We have to make sure the run efforts become minimal as the game goes on by plugging the gaps to allow LB's to run to the football. Better to have Rodgers become one dimensional. Lacy is the key to me. Thankfully GB seldom involves the TE. Their wides will have their moments, that's a given, but Lacy becomes the real key here.

Yes we gotta pound....BUT he also need to throw the football DOWN the field on play action.
Screen will also be huge this week.

GO COWBOYS!

I think we can pound the ball right down Green Bay's throat. Personally I'd give Murray 25 carries and hopefully give Randle and Dunbar another 15 touches. Keep Rodger's off the field with long, sustained drives. Let him play catch up till he tears his calf muscle again. I have a feeling Rodger's won't last the game anyway.

As long as we are in the lead or close behind I agree with you, assuming we can run the ball well. Going into the game, this is the one NFC Team we should be game planning to run on. While most teams struggle if they are made to be one dimensional, it seems even more obvious with the Dallas Offense. It was clear that once we started running the ball a little better against Detroit that the whole offense opened up for us. When we don't run at all, Romo gets killed. When we do our Offense works much better. I am starting to get a little more confident with our chances in this game. If the cold weather tightens up that calf on Rodgers and makes him a little less effective than usual, I wonder if they even should be the favorite.

[Romotodez]

Maybe Rodgers is hurt a little more than it seems. I have to admit when he was carted off vs Det. I thought he was done. 2 series later I think he completed 8 straight and Led them to a TD. GB has made some switches with their LBs. They have actually been a lot better vs the run the second half of the season. Now hey haven't went up against our Oline and Murray in those games either.

[PDay8810]

Rodgers is fine and should be at the top of his game throwing the football. I think he knows any sudden bursts from the pocket could pull that thing again, thus his mobility will be somewhat limited...which helps our dline. Still have to keep a LB at the line for dump offs and QB runs from pressure, but this helps greatly.

Tip Ball...something, but I expect Rodgers to throw his first at home INT of the season on Sunday. Maybe that will be due to his lack of mobility.

[RJ MacReady1]

Look at the games Green bay lost. All by teams who rushed 30 times or more. All other teams rushed less then 30 and lost.

And everyone of those teams won the time of possession.

[bluejerseyjinx]

Rodgers is fine and should be at the top of his game throwing the football. I think he knows any sudden bursts from the pocket could pull that thing again, thus his mobility will be somewhat limited...which helps our dline. Still have to keep a LB at the line for dump offs and QB runs from pressure, but this helps greatly.

Tip Ball...something, but I expect Rodgers to throw his first at home INT of the season on Sunday. Maybe that will be due to his lack of mobility.

If we can get 2 or more turnovers in this game and play well on offense, I can see us winning comfortably.

[CarlHoudini]

Look at the games Green bay lost. All by teams who rushed 30 times or more. All other teams rushed less then 30 and lost.

And everyone of those teams won the time of possession.

That's the type of stat you really have to dive into and decipher. Teams that win often tend to run more, but they didn't necessarily win because they ran a lot. For example, a team destroys another team in the air in the first half, with 22 passes and 8 runs. In the 2nd half they pass 8 times and run 22 times. They ran 30 times total, but it's not what won them the game, it was basically how they ran out the clock.

Don't get me wrong, if Dallas wins, I think they'll do so in part by doing some damage on the ground. I just think for years some of us beat the "just run it" drum, and ignored the fact that Dallas didn't seem to be able to get it done on the ground, at least not until last season. If you can't run, and you're falling behind, eventually you're going to have to pass, especially if your defense isn't too good, which was also the case in Dallas for a few years.

[Eiknarflin]

The nice thing about the Detroit game is that even though the Defense was getting beat up early on, it was the D's aggressiveness and stick-to-it-iveness that actually turned the game around so that we could keep pounding the ball.

In years past, if the offense sputtered early, the run would have to be abandoned to have a chance to catch up. This year, the d is coming close to pulling it's own weight and, on a couple of occasions, pulled the offense up off the turf.

I expect a competitive game on Sunday, with a few fingers and toes left on the frozen tundra of Lambeau field.

[Jarntt]

Look at the games Green bay lost. All by teams who rushed 30 times or more. All other teams rushed less then 30 and lost.

And everyone of those teams won the time of possession.

That's the type of stat you really have to dive into and decipher. Teams that win often tend to run more, but they didn't necessarily win because they ran a lot. For example, a team destroys another team in the air in the first half, with 22 passes and 8 runs. In the 2nd half they pass 8 times and run 22 times. They ran 30 times total, but it's not what won them the game, it was basically how they ran out the clock.

Don't get me wrong, if Dallas wins, I think they'll do so in part by doing some damage on the ground. I just think for years some of us beat the "just run it" drum, and ignored the fact that Dallas didn't seem to be able to get it done on the ground, at least not until last season. If you can't run, and you're falling behind, eventually you're going to have to pass, especially if your defense isn't too good, which was also the case in Dallas for a few years.

Totally agree with paragraph 1 and glad you wrote it, because I've tried to explain that on various points a million times already.works that way with many stats.

On paragraph two I think you are part right and part wrong by a mile. We abandoned the run way too easily and seldom ran it enough to find out if we could get it done or not in games where it didn't work from the start. Running it even when it isn't working is still sometimes smart because when teams knew we were passing and pinned back their ears and came at us it was normally very bad for us.

[CarlHoudini]

Look at the games Green bay lost. All by teams who rushed 30 times or more. All other teams rushed less then 30 and lost.

And everyone of those teams won the time of possession.

That's the type of stat you really have to dive into and decipher. Teams that win often tend to run more, but they didn't necessarily win because they ran a lot. For example, a team destroys another team in the air in the first half, with 22 passes and 8 runs. In the 2nd half they pass 8 times and run 22 times. They ran 30 times total, but it's not what won them the game, it was basically how they ran out the clock.

Don't get me wrong, if Dallas wins, I think they'll do so in part by doing some damage on the ground. I just think for years some of us beat the "just run it" drum, and ignored the fact that Dallas didn't seem to be able to get it done on the ground, at least not until last season. If you can't run, and you're falling behind, eventually you're going to have to pass, especially if your defense isn't too good, which was also the case in Dallas for a few years.

Totally agree with paragraph 1 and glad you wrote it, because I've tried to explain that on various points a million times already.works that way with many stats.

On paragraph two I think you are part right and part wrong by a mile. We abandoned the run way too easily and seldom ran it enough to find out if we could get it done or not in games where it didn't work from the start. Running it even when it isn't working is still sometimes smart because when teams knew we were passing and pinned back their ears and came at us it was normally very bad for us.

Yeah, we'll have to agree to disagree. Don't get me wrong, Garrett has frustrated me in the past with the running game, but it wasn't until last season that I thought the Cowboys actually had the horses to be a good running team. Even when Barber and Jones were a solid tandem, it seemed like the best run the Cowboys had was the draw play. That's pretty sad. I think necessity and investments forced them to run the ball, and thank God, not only did it work, but they realized they should stick with it. Better late than never, I suppose.

[PDay8810]

Look at the games Green bay lost. All by teams who rushed 30 times or more. All other teams rushed less then 30 and lost.

And everyone of those teams won the time of possession.

That's the type of stat you really have to dive into and decipher. Teams that win often tend to run more, but they didn't necessarily win because they ran a lot. For example, a team destroys another team in the air in the first half, with 22 passes and 8 runs. In the 2nd half they pass 8 times and run 22 times. They ran 30 times total, but it's not what won them the game, it was basically how they ran out the clock.

Don't get me wrong, if Dallas wins, I think they'll do so in part by doing some damage on the ground. I just think for years some of us beat the "just run it" drum, and ignored the fact that Dallas didn't seem to be able to get it done on the ground, at least not until last season. If you can't run, and you're falling behind, eventually you're going to have to pass, especially if your defense isn't too good, which was also the case in Dallas for a few years.

I agree....running to be running won't fly.
I also think we need to control the clock and running becomes key to do that. I just think you also gotta spread the field and make um pay a price for 8 in the box

[PDay8810]

"I think necessity and investments forced them to run the ball, and thank God, not only did it work, but they realized they should stick with it. Better late than never, I suppose."

yes sir....investments indeed and all three are pretty darn good