Packers at 49ers (1 Viewer)

[sho nuff]

I don't think the Packers were better at WR or DB. Tramon Williams had chances, so did Woodson. Kaepernick beat them like a drum. Total obliteration in every facet of the game. I hope they can Capers and bring back a 4-3. This 3-4 scheme is getting torched by rushing attacks.

It's not scheme, it's personnel. The 3-4 is the ideal defense in the nfl. The team that destroyed us runs the 3-4. The remaining teams in the afc playoffs run the 3-4.

Yeah, the real issue is that TT hasn't been able to find good enough DLs and LBs to run the scheme. Clay has been a beast, but the opposite side continues to be an issue. And sorry TT, but Nick Perry didn't look like the answer there either....solid but nothing spectacular.....

Perry is definitely a project. He looked strong to help run support...but not quick like Matthews. He seemed to only have one move of trying a bull rush.

 

[Chaz McNulty]

The Harbaughs just never, ever, stop complaining. Jim was stomping his feet like a kid not getting his way in a candy store at the end of the first half. They look pathetic, both of them.

Jim Harbaugh is one of the least likable human beings ever that didn't commit some great atrocity.

Pete Carroll says hi.

Pete hates Harbaugh too.

Do you think the brothers hate each other? I wonder what it was like growing up in that household when they didn't get their way? God their parents must have had alot of patients not to throttle the two of them.

 

[Warrior]

The Harbaughs just never, ever, stop complaining. Jim was stomping his feet like a kid not getting his way in a candy store at the end of the first half. They look pathetic, both of them.

Jim Harbaugh is one of the least likable human beings ever that didn't commit some great atrocity.

Pete Carroll says hi.

Pete hates Harbaugh too.

Do you think the brothers hate each other? I wonder what it was like growing up in that household when they didn't get their way? God their parents must have had alot of patients not to throttle the two of them.

Fun fact...the Harbaugh parents were doctors?

 

[The Kerminator]

Packers.

Seahags Packers

 

[Sarnoff]

Walden blowing the game.

He's a UFA after this season.He pretty much played himself out of a job on Saturday. No way they sign him back now.

 

[tdmills]

The Harbaughs just never, ever, stop complaining. Jim was stomping his feet like a kid not getting his way in a candy store at the end of the first half. They look pathetic, both of them.

Jim Harbaugh is one of the least likable human beings ever that didn't commit some great atrocity.

Pete Carroll says hi.

Pete hates Harbaugh too.

Do you think the brothers hate each other? I wonder what it was like growing up in that household when they didn't get their way? God their parents must have had alot of patients not to throttle the two of them.

Fun fact...the Harbaugh parents were doctors?

Jack Harbaugh won a National Title at Western Kentucky in 2002

 

[Gopher State]

The Packers are the victims of Thompson's draft-only philosophy and neglect in acquiring the bruising linebackers and safeties it takes to compete with the physical offenses of NFC contenders San Francisco and the New York Giants, etc. Packers will continue to be good enough to make the playoffs, but no good enough to win it all.

 

[Warrior]

The Harbaughs just never, ever, stop complaining. Jim was stomping his feet like a kid not getting his way in a candy store at the end of the first half. They look pathetic, both of them.

Jim Harbaugh is one of the least likable human beings ever that didn't commit some great atrocity.

Pete Carroll says hi.

Pete hates Harbaugh too.

Do you think the brothers hate each other? I wonder what it was like growing up in that household when they didn't get their way? God their parents must have had alot of patients not to throttle the two of them.

Fun fact...the Harbaugh parents were doctors?

Jack Harbaugh won a National Title at Western Kentucky in 2002

Wow...he saw patients during the week and still found time to win a national title on the weekends?

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

The Harbaughs just never, ever, stop complaining. Jim was stomping his feet like a kid not getting his way in a candy store at the end of the first half. They look pathetic, both of them.

Jim Harbaugh is one of the least likable human beings ever that didn't commit some great atrocity.

Pete Carroll says hi.

Oh come on

Pete Carroll's a massive #####. Seahawks fans shouldn't be talking #### about other teams' coaches IMO.

 

[Mr.Pack]

The Packers are the victims of Thompson's draft-only philosophy and neglect in acquiring the bruising linebackers and safeties it takes to compete with the physical offenses of NFC contenders San Francisco and the New York Giants, etc. Packers will continue to be good enough to make the playoffs, but no good enough to win it all.

So you read the Journal/Sentinel too?Leave it to a Viking fan to rip off an article and try to pass it off as his own.

 

[sho nuff]

The Packers are the victims of Thompson's draft-only philosophy and neglect in acquiring the bruising linebackers and safeties it takes to compete with the physical offenses of NFC contenders San Francisco and the New York Giants, etc. Packers will continue to be good enough to make the playoffs, but no good enough to win it all.

So you read the Journal/Sentinel too?Leave it to a Viking fan to rip off an article and try to pass it off as his own.

Yup...plagiarism at its finest.http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/packers-will-make-changes-after-getting-demolished-in-playoffs-again-jk8c80g-186722401.html

 

[Pipes]

The Packers are the victims of Thompson's draft-only philosophy and neglect in acquiring the bruising linebackers and safeties it takes to compete with the physical offenses of NFC contenders San Francisco and the New York Giants, etc. Packers will continue to be good enough to make the playoffs, but no good enough to win it all.

So you read the Journal/Sentinel too?Leave it to a Viking fan to rip off an article and try to pass it off as his own.

Not only that they did win a Superbowl just 2 years ago so that building a team through the draft has some merit. Plus Nick Collins was arguably the best safety in the game in the prime of his career. I think his loss is much greater than anyone ever anticipated.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

The Packers are the victims of Thompson's draft-only philosophy and neglect in acquiring the bruising linebackers and safeties it takes to compete with the physical offenses of NFC contenders San Francisco and the New York Giants, etc. Packers will continue to be good enough to make the playoffs, but no good enough to win it all.

So you read the Journal/Sentinel too?Leave it to a Viking fan to rip off an article and try to pass it off as his own.

Yup...plagiarism at its finest.http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/packers-will-make-changes-after-getting-demolished-in-playoffs-again-jk8c80g-186722401.html

The best part of the article was where they referred to AJ Hawk as agile. Evidently, the author never saw him in pass coverage.

 

[Carl Eller's Dead Liver]

Trolls even good posting their own trolling now?

Must be a 49ers fan? Well just wait until next year buddy! ARod is going to eat your team up! He's got a chip on his shoulder now!

Shut the #### up, Carl

 

[snogger]

The Packers are the victims of Thompson's draft-only philosophy and neglect in acquiring the bruising linebackers and safeties it takes to compete with the physical offenses of NFC contenders San Francisco and the New York Giants, etc. Packers will continue to be good enough to make the playoffs, but no good enough to win it all.

So you read the Journal/Sentinel too?Leave it to a Viking fan to rip off an article and try to pass it off as his own.

Yup...plagiarism at its finest.http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/packers-will-make-changes-after-getting-demolished-in-playoffs-again-jk8c80g-186722401.html

Great done here by Mr. Pack and Sho nuff

 

[Carl Eller's Dead Liver]

In the Packers three playoff losses in the last four seasons, they have been outscored by a combined score of 133-96. That's an average of allowing 44 points a game. I wonder if any other NFL team ever has ever allowed that many combined points in three straight playoff losses.

Honestly, I think it's a catch 22. When you have such a pass oriented offense your defense is going to give up a lot of points in losses. Sure the Packers D hasn't been great by any means, but it's not all the D's fault.One of the Packers' biggest blunders of the past 5 years is not drafting a viable RB. They could have drafted David Wilson or Dough Martin in the first round this past year......and they'd likely still be playing this Sunday. It's tough to win the playoffs minus an effective running game. And no Packers fans, Harris and Grant are not viable RB's. Go get a real back!

 

[Fla\/\/ed]

In the Packers three playoff losses in the last four seasons, they have been outscored by a combined score of 133-96. That's an average of allowing 44 points a game. I wonder if any other NFL team ever has ever allowed that many combined points in three straight playoff losses.

Honestly, I think it's a catch 22. When you have such a pass oriented offense your defense is going to give up a lot of points in losses. Sure the Packers D hasn't been great by any means, but it's not all the D's fault.One of the Packers' biggest blunders of the past 5 years is not drafting a viable RB. They could have drafted David Wilson or Dough Martin in the first round this past year......and they'd likely still be playing this Sunday. It's tough to win the playoffs minus an effective running game. And no Packers fans, Harris and Grant are not viable RB's. Go get a real back!

So a running back would have made the defense play better?

 

[tdmills]

In the Packers three playoff losses in the last four seasons, they have been outscored by a combined score of 133-96. That's an average of allowing 44 points a game. I wonder if any other NFL team ever has ever allowed that many combined points in three straight playoff losses.

Honestly, I think it's a catch 22. When you have such a pass oriented offense your defense is going to give up a lot of points in losses. Sure the Packers D hasn't been great by any means, but it's not all the D's fault.One of the Packers' biggest blunders of the past 5 years is not drafting a viable RB. They could have drafted David Wilson or Dough Martin in the first round this past year......and they'd likely still be playing this Sunday. It's tough to win the playoffs minus an effective running game. And no Packers fans, Harris and Grant are not viable RB's. Go get a real back!

So a running back would have made the defense play better?

Yes. Time of possession was not in the Packers favor, hence defense gets tired, hence can't stop SF in the second half.

 

[Fla\/\/ed]

In the Packers three playoff losses in the last four seasons, they have been outscored by a combined score of 133-96. That's an average of allowing 44 points a game. I wonder if any other NFL team ever has ever allowed that many combined points in three straight playoff losses.

Honestly, I think it's a catch 22. When you have such a pass oriented offense your defense is going to give up a lot of points in losses. Sure the Packers D hasn't been great by any means, but it's not all the D's fault.One of the Packers' biggest blunders of the past 5 years is not drafting a viable RB. They could have drafted David Wilson or Dough Martin in the first round this past year......and they'd likely still be playing this Sunday. It's tough to win the playoffs minus an effective running game. And no Packers fans, Harris and Grant are not viable RB's. Go get a real back!

So a running back would have made the defense play better?

Yes. Time of possession was not in the Packers favor, hence defense gets tired, hence can't stop SF in the second half.

Yet you are forgetting McCarthy's love of the passing game and the fact the Packers defense has some major flaws. Saying that a running back like Martin or Wilson would have allowed the Packers to win on Saturday is naive.

 

[Mr.Pack]

In the Packers three playoff losses in the last four seasons, they have been outscored by a combined score of 133-96. That's an average of allowing 44 points a game. I wonder if any other NFL team ever has ever allowed that many combined points in three straight playoff losses.

Honestly, I think it's a catch 22. When you have such a pass oriented offense your defense is going to give up a lot of points in losses. Sure the Packers D hasn't been great by any means, but it's not all the D's fault.One of the Packers' biggest blunders of the past 5 years is not drafting a viable RB. They could have drafted David Wilson or Dough Martin in the first round this past year......and they'd likely still be playing this Sunday. It's tough to win the playoffs minus an effective running game. And no Packers fans, Harris and Grant are not viable RB's. Go get a real back!

So a running back would have made the defense play better?

Yes. Time of possession was not in the Packers favor, hence defense gets tired, hence can't stop SF in the second half.

Yet you are forgetting McCarthy's love of the passing game and the fact the Packers defense has some major flaws. Saying that a running back like Martin or Wilson would have allowed the Packers to win on Saturday is naive.

Exactly.Harris was averaging close to 5yds/carry early in the game.

 

[tdmills]

In the Packers three playoff losses in the last four seasons, they have been outscored by a combined score of 133-96. That's an average of allowing 44 points a game. I wonder if any other NFL team ever has ever allowed that many combined points in three straight playoff losses.

Honestly, I think it's a catch 22. When you have such a pass oriented offense your defense is going to give up a lot of points in losses. Sure the Packers D hasn't been great by any means, but it's not all the D's fault.One of the Packers' biggest blunders of the past 5 years is not drafting a viable RB. They could have drafted David Wilson or Dough Martin in the first round this past year......and they'd likely still be playing this Sunday. It's tough to win the playoffs minus an effective running game. And no Packers fans, Harris and Grant are not viable RB's. Go get a real back!

So a running back would have made the defense play better?

Yes. Time of possession was not in the Packers favor, hence defense gets tired, hence can't stop SF in the second half.

Yet you are forgetting McCarthy's love of the passing game and the fact the Packers defense has some major flaws. Saying that a running back like Martin or Wilson would have allowed the Packers to win on Saturday is naive.

Did I say if they had a said RB they would win? No. If GB had a better RB, the defense would've been less tired. Scoring drives in first half for SF: 80, 48, 62. Second half: 80,93,93. If you don't think running the ball would've helped a defense become less tired, well then I can't tell you 100 pennies = a dollar.

 

[Fla\/\/ed]

In the Packers three playoff losses in the last four seasons, they have been outscored by a combined score of 133-96. That's an average of allowing 44 points a game. I wonder if any other NFL team ever has ever allowed that many combined points in three straight playoff losses.

Honestly, I think it's a catch 22. When you have such a pass oriented offense your defense is going to give up a lot of points in losses. Sure the Packers D hasn't been great by any means, but it's not all the D's fault.One of the Packers' biggest blunders of the past 5 years is not drafting a viable RB. They could have drafted David Wilson or Dough Martin in the first round this past year......and they'd likely still be playing this Sunday. It's tough to win the playoffs minus an effective running game. And no Packers fans, Harris and Grant are not viable RB's. Go get a real back!

So a running back would have made the defense play better?

Yes. Time of possession was not in the Packers favor, hence defense gets tired, hence can't stop SF in the second half.

Yet you are forgetting McCarthy's love of the passing game and the fact the Packers defense has some major flaws. Saying that a running back like Martin or Wilson would have allowed the Packers to win on Saturday is naive.

Did I say if they had a said RB they would win? No. If GB had a better RB, the defense would've been less tired. Scoring drives in first half for SF: 80, 48, 62. Second half: 80,93,93. If you don't think running the ball would've helped a defense become less tired, well then I can't tell you 100 pennies = a dollar.

And when has McCarthy shown that he can make a commitment to running the ball? Of course keeping a defense off the field can make them less tired but that still doesn't fix the huge flaws that the 49'ers exposed with their game plan.

 

[Carl Eller's Dead Liver]

In the Packers three playoff losses in the last four seasons, they have been outscored by a combined score of 133-96. That's an average of allowing 44 points a game. I wonder if any other NFL team ever has ever allowed that many combined points in three straight playoff losses.

Honestly, I think it's a catch 22. When you have such a pass oriented offense your defense is going to give up a lot of points in losses. Sure the Packers D hasn't been great by any means, but it's not all the D's fault.One of the Packers' biggest blunders of the past 5 years is not drafting a viable RB. They could have drafted David Wilson or Dough Martin in the first round this past year......and they'd likely still be playing this Sunday. It's tough to win the playoffs minus an effective running game. And no Packers fans, Harris and Grant are not viable RB's. Go get a real back!

So a running back would have made the defense play better?

Yes. Time of possession was not in the Packers favor, hence defense gets tired, hence can't stop SF in the second half.

Yet you are forgetting McCarthy's love of the passing game and the fact the Packers defense has some major flaws. Saying that a running back like Martin or Wilson would have allowed the Packers to win on Saturday is naive.

Did I say if they had a said RB they would win? No. If GB had a better RB, the defense would've been less tired. Scoring drives in first half for SF: 80, 48, 62. Second half: 80,93,93. If you don't think running the ball would've helped a defense become less tired, well then I can't tell you 100 pennies = a dollar.

And when has McCarthy shown that he can make a commitment to running the ball? Of course keeping a defense off the field can make them less tired but that still doesn't fix the huge flaws that the 49'ers exposed with their game plan.

Yes, a good running game does help out a defense. Time of possession and resting your defense is a HUGE part of it! The Packers have failed to address RB for years now! Instead of drafting whoever it was (DE I think), they could have helped their defense more by drafting David Wilson or Doug Martin this year! It's kind of laughable actually.....the Pack have hit on the most dificult position to fill (QB) and neglected the easiest one to fill (RB).

 

[sho nuff]

In the Packers three playoff losses in the last four seasons, they have been outscored by a combined score of 133-96. That's an average of allowing 44 points a game. I wonder if any other NFL team ever has ever allowed that many combined points in three straight playoff losses.

Honestly, I think it's a catch 22. When you have such a pass oriented offense your defense is going to give up a lot of points in losses. Sure the Packers D hasn't been great by any means, but it's not all the D's fault.One of the Packers' biggest blunders of the past 5 years is not drafting a viable RB. They could have drafted David Wilson or Dough Martin in the first round this past year......and they'd likely still be playing this Sunday. It's tough to win the playoffs minus an effective running game. And no Packers fans, Harris and Grant are not viable RB's. Go get a real back!

So a running back would have made the defense play better?

Yes. Time of possession was not in the Packers favor, hence defense gets tired, hence can't stop SF in the second half.

Yet you are forgetting McCarthy's love of the passing game and the fact the Packers defense has some major flaws. Saying that a running back like Martin or Wilson would have allowed the Packers to win on Saturday is naive.

Agreed...especially since they were running the ball well earlier in the game before McCarthy went pass happy in the 3rd.I think McCarthy is a very good/great coach at this point. He has had his struggles in the past and overcome a lot and has a great grasp of this team.But he still has that tendency to abandon any run game and start electing for these intermediate/deeper pass game rather than keep the run game and the short passes that work so well for this offense.Why was Cobb not involved til the 3rd quarter. How many 3rd and shortish plays did we have in the first and never looked like Cobb was on the field for those (our first options were Harris out of the backfield and Kuhn on the first drive?)

 

[sho nuff]

And when has McCarthy shown that he can make a commitment to running the ball? Of course keeping a defense off the field can make them less tired but that still doesn't fix the huge flaws that the 49'ers exposed with their game plan.

He has at times shown he could...but never for more than a game or two at a time.

 

[Carl Eller's Dead Liver]

In the Packers three playoff losses in the last four seasons, they have been outscored by a combined score of 133-96. That's an average of allowing 44 points a game. I wonder if any other NFL team ever has ever allowed that many combined points in three straight playoff losses.

Honestly, I think it's a catch 22. When you have such a pass oriented offense your defense is going to give up a lot of points in losses. Sure the Packers D hasn't been great by any means, but it's not all the D's fault.One of the Packers' biggest blunders of the past 5 years is not drafting a viable RB. They could have drafted David Wilson or Dough Martin in the first round this past year......and they'd likely still be playing this Sunday. It's tough to win the playoffs minus an effective running game. And no Packers fans, Harris and Grant are not viable RB's. Go get a real back!

So a running back would have made the defense play better?

Yes. Time of possession was not in the Packers favor, hence defense gets tired, hence can't stop SF in the second half.

Yet you are forgetting McCarthy's love of the passing game and the fact the Packers defense has some major flaws. Saying that a running back like Martin or Wilson would have allowed the Packers to win on Saturday is naive.

Did I say if they had a said RB they would win? No. If GB had a better RB, the defense would've been less tired. Scoring drives in first half for SF: 80, 48, 62. Second half: 80,93,93. If you don't think running the ball would've helped a defense become less tired, well then I can't tell you 100 pennies = a dollar.

And when has McCarthy shown that he can make a commitment to running the ball? Of course keeping a defense off the field can make them less tired but that still doesn't fix the huge flaws that the 49'ers exposed with their game plan.

Yes, a good running game does help out a defense. Time of possession and resting your defense is a HUGE part of it! The Packers have failed to address RB for years now! Instead of drafting whoever it was (DE I think), they could have helped their defense more by drafting David Wilson or Doug Martin this year! It's kind of laughable actually.....the Pack have hit on the most dificult position to fill (QB) and neglected the easiest one to fill (RB).

 

[Fla\/\/ed]

And when has McCarthy shown that he can make a commitment to running the ball? Of course keeping a defense off the field can make them less tired but that still doesn't fix the huge flaws that the 49'ers exposed with their game plan.

He has at times shown he could...but never for more than a game or two at a time.

Exactly which is why he hasn't shown a commitment to running the ball. He loves to throw the ball and for the most part I don't have a problem with that. However, this season it was apparent the opposing defenses have adjusted to the Packers air attack and McCarthy has to make some adjustments for 2013. I would like to see that involved more running and drafting a good RB but Thompson hasn't shown he likes to use high draft picks for RBs.

 

[Pipes]

And when has McCarthy shown that he can make a commitment to running the ball? Of course keeping a defense off the field can make them less tired but that still doesn't fix the huge flaws that the 49'ers exposed with their game plan.

He has at times shown he could...but never for more than a game or two at a time.

Exactly which is why he hasn't shown a commitment to running the ball. He loves to throw the ball and for the most part I don't have a problem with that. However, this season it was apparent the opposing defenses have adjusted to the Packers air attack and McCarthy has to make some adjustments for 2013. I would like to see that involved more running and drafting a good RB but Thompson hasn't shown he likes to use high draft picks for RBs.

 

[Fla\/\/ed]

In the Packers three playoff losses in the last four seasons, they have been outscored by a combined score of 133-96. That's an average of allowing 44 points a game. I wonder if any other NFL team ever has ever allowed that many combined points in three straight playoff losses.

Honestly, I think it's a catch 22. When you have such a pass oriented offense your defense is going to give up a lot of points in losses. Sure the Packers D hasn't been great by any means, but it's not all the D's fault.One of the Packers' biggest blunders of the past 5 years is not drafting a viable RB. They could have drafted David Wilson or Dough Martin in the first round this past year......and they'd likely still be playing this Sunday. It's tough to win the playoffs minus an effective running game. And no Packers fans, Harris and Grant are not viable RB's. Go get a real back!

So a running back would have made the defense play better?

Yes. Time of possession was not in the Packers favor, hence defense gets tired, hence can't stop SF in the second half.

Yet you are forgetting McCarthy's love of the passing game and the fact the Packers defense has some major flaws. Saying that a running back like Martin or Wilson would have allowed the Packers to win on Saturday is naive.

Did I say if they had a said RB they would win? No. If GB had a better RB, the defense would've been less tired. Scoring drives in first half for SF: 80, 48, 62. Second half: 80,93,93. If you don't think running the ball would've helped a defense become less tired, well then I can't tell you 100 pennies = a dollar.

And when has McCarthy shown that he can make a commitment to running the ball? Of course keeping a defense off the field can make them less tired but that still doesn't fix the huge flaws that the 49'ers exposed with their game plan.

Yes, a good running game does help out a defense. Time of possession and resting your defense is a HUGE part of it! The Packers have failed to address RB for years now! Instead of drafting whoever it was (DE I think), they could have helped their defense more by drafting David Wilson or Doug Martin this year! It's kind of laughable actually.....the Pack have hit on the most dificult position to fill (QB) and neglected the easiest one to fill (RB).

I agree with all of that. I just don't think a good RB would have changed the outcome of the game on Saturday. The 49'ers had a great game plan and the Packers defense were not a match for them rested or tired.I also think that those getting on Capers need to focus some attention on Thompson the roster he is putting together. Coaching is one thing but a team also has to have the players to make a team great.

 

[tdmills]

And when has McCarthy shown that he can make a commitment to running the ball? Of course keeping a defense off the field can make them less tired but that still doesn't fix the huge flaws that the 49'ers exposed with their game plan.

He has at times shown he could...but never for more than a game or two at a time.

Exactly which is why he hasn't shown a commitment to running the ball. He loves to throw the ball and for the most part I don't have a problem with that. However, this season it was apparent the opposing defenses have adjusted to the Packers air attack and McCarthy has to make some adjustments for 2013. I would like to see that involved more running and drafting a good RB but Thompson hasn't shown he likes to use high draft picks for RBs.

Wouldn't a better RB make McCarthy more comfortable calling run plays as well? It works both ways here.

 

[Carl Eller's Dead Liver]

And when has McCarthy shown that he can make a commitment to running the ball? Of course keeping a defense off the field can make them less tired but that still doesn't fix the huge flaws that the 49'ers exposed with their game plan.

He has at times shown he could...but never for more than a game or two at a time.

Exactly which is why he hasn't shown a commitment to running the ball. He loves to throw the ball and for the most part I don't have a problem with that. However, this season it was apparent the opposing defenses have adjusted to the Packers air attack and McCarthy has to make some adjustments for 2013. I would like to see that involved more running and drafting a good RB but Thompson hasn't shown he likes to use high draft picks for RBs.

And this isn't the draft to get your elite RB by the way it looks. They missed a golden opportunity this past draft.....draft Nick Perry. WHO?!?

 

[Carl Eller's Dead Liver]

And when has McCarthy shown that he can make a commitment to running the ball? Of course keeping a defense off the field can make them less tired but that still doesn't fix the huge flaws that the 49'ers exposed with their game plan.

He has at times shown he could...but never for more than a game or two at a time.

Exactly which is why he hasn't shown a commitment to running the ball. He loves to throw the ball and for the most part I don't have a problem with that. However, this season it was apparent the opposing defenses have adjusted to the Packers air attack and McCarthy has to make some adjustments for 2013. I would like to see that involved more running and drafting a good RB but Thompson hasn't shown he likes to use high draft picks for RBs.

And this isn't the draft to get your elite RB by the way it looks. They missed a golden opportunity this past draft.....draft Nick Perry. WHO?!?

 

[Fla\/\/ed]

And when has McCarthy shown that he can make a commitment to running the ball? Of course keeping a defense off the field can make them less tired but that still doesn't fix the huge flaws that the 49'ers exposed with their game plan.

He has at times shown he could...but never for more than a game or two at a time.

Exactly which is why he hasn't shown a commitment to running the ball. He loves to throw the ball and for the most part I don't have a problem with that. However, this season it was apparent the opposing defenses have adjusted to the Packers air attack and McCarthy has to make some adjustments for 2013. I would like to see that involved more running and drafting a good RB but Thompson hasn't shown he likes to use high draft picks for RBs.

And this isn't the draft to get your elite RB by the way it looks. They missed a golden opportunity this past draft.....draft Nick Perry. WHO?!?

Thompson also made a mistake in not pursuing Marshawn Lynch when he was avaible.

 

[Fla\/\/ed]

And when has McCarthy shown that he can make a commitment to running the ball? Of course keeping a defense off the field can make them less tired but that still doesn't fix the huge flaws that the 49'ers exposed with their game plan.

He has at times shown he could...but never for more than a game or two at a time.

Exactly which is why he hasn't shown a commitment to running the ball. He loves to throw the ball and for the most part I don't have a problem with that. However, this season it was apparent the opposing defenses have adjusted to the Packers air attack and McCarthy has to make some adjustments for 2013. I would like to see that involved more running and drafting a good RB but Thompson hasn't shown he likes to use high draft picks for RBs.

And this isn't the draft to get your elite RB by the way it looks. They missed a golden opportunity this past draft.....draft Nick Perry. WHO?!?

at your own posts

 

[sho nuff]

And when has McCarthy shown that he can make a commitment to running the ball? Of course keeping a defense off the field can make them less tired but that still doesn't fix the huge flaws that the 49'ers exposed with their game plan.

He has at times shown he could...but never for more than a game or two at a time.

Exactly which is why he hasn't shown a commitment to running the ball. He loves to throw the ball and for the most part I don't have a problem with that. However, this season it was apparent the opposing defenses have adjusted to the Packers air attack and McCarthy has to make some adjustments for 2013. I would like to see that involved more running and drafting a good RB but Thompson hasn't shown he likes to use high draft picks for RBs.

I think adjustents are also needed by McCarthy and TT as well.MM needs to realize that while his best and most effective toy is the right arm of #12...he needs to keep that toy in better shape and not overuse it despite what the numbers tell him.I think they could be fine without a high draft pick on an RB (mainly because of the shelf life of such players...but obvioulsy what will help them these days is you can get better RBs later in round one and even 2 now where a few years ago you had to spend a first or top 2nd rounder to get anything at all).But without a top draft pick...there will be a few vets out there that shouldn't come that expensive that could be brought in to play in a committee role with a guy like Harris.

 

[Mr.Pack]

And when has McCarthy shown that he can make a commitment to running the ball? Of course keeping a defense off the field can make them less tired but that still doesn't fix the huge flaws that the 49'ers exposed with their game plan.

He has at times shown he could...but never for more than a game or two at a time.

Exactly which is why he hasn't shown a commitment to running the ball. He loves to throw the ball and for the most part I don't have a problem with that. However, this season it was apparent the opposing defenses have adjusted to the Packers air attack and McCarthy has to make some adjustments for 2013. I would like to see that involved more running and drafting a good RB but Thompson hasn't shown he likes to use high draft picks for RBs.

Wouldn't a better RB make McCarthy more comfortable calling run plays as well? It works both ways here.

How much better can you be than 5yds/carry????

 

[Stinger Ray]

And when has McCarthy shown that he can make a commitment to running the ball? Of course keeping a defense off the field can make them less tired but that still doesn't fix the huge flaws that the 49'ers exposed with their game plan.

He has at times shown he could...but never for more than a game or two at a time.

Exactly which is why he hasn't shown a commitment to running the ball. He loves to throw the ball and for the most part I don't have a problem with that. However, this season it was apparent the opposing defenses have adjusted to the Packers air attack and McCarthy has to make some adjustments for 2013. I would like to see that involved more running and drafting a good RB but Thompson hasn't shown he likes to use high draft picks for RBs.

Wouldn't a better RB make McCarthy more comfortable calling run plays as well? It works both ways here.

How much better can you be than 5yds/carry????

 

[tdmills]

And when has McCarthy shown that he can make a commitment to running the ball? Of course keeping a defense off the field can make them less tired but that still doesn't fix the huge flaws that the 49'ers exposed with their game plan.

He has at times shown he could...but never for more than a game or two at a time.

Exactly which is why he hasn't shown a commitment to running the ball. He loves to throw the ball and for the most part I don't have a problem with that. However, this season it was apparent the opposing defenses have adjusted to the Packers air attack and McCarthy has to make some adjustments for 2013. I would like to see that involved more running and drafting a good RB but Thompson hasn't shown he likes to use high draft picks for RBs.

Wouldn't a better RB make McCarthy more comfortable calling run plays as well? It works both ways here.

How much better can you be than 5yds/carry????

on 11 carries Kaepernick averaged over 10

 

[Mr.Pack]

And when has McCarthy shown that he can make a commitment to running the ball? Of course keeping a defense off the field can make them less tired but that still doesn't fix the huge flaws that the 49'ers exposed with their game plan.

He has at times shown he could...but never for more than a game or two at a time.

Exactly which is why he hasn't shown a commitment to running the ball. He loves to throw the ball and for the most part I don't have a problem with that. However, this season it was apparent the opposing defenses have adjusted to the Packers air attack and McCarthy has to make some adjustments for 2013. I would like to see that involved more running and drafting a good RB but Thompson hasn't shown he likes to use high draft picks for RBs.

Wouldn't a better RB make McCarthy more comfortable calling run plays as well? It works both ways here.

How much better can you be than 5yds/carry????

on 11 carries Kaepernick averaged over 10

Helllllloooooo....Exactly what we are saying. It's not the RB it's the commitment to the run.You just answered our argument.I swear, some people just argue to argue.

 

[Illegal Pants Downfield]

Exactly which is why he hasn't shown a commitment to running the ball. He loves to throw the ball and for the most part I don't have a problem with that. However, this season it was apparent the opposing defenses have adjusted to the Packers air attack and McCarthy has to make some adjustments for 2013. I would like to see that involved more running and drafting a good RB but Thompson hasn't shown he likes to use high draft picks for RBs.

TT took Brandon Jackson in the 2nd round & Alex Green in the 3rd in recent years. There have been plenty of productive backs taken in those stages of the draft, including 3rd-rounder Frank Gore who we couldn't stop in 2 games this year. So, I'd argue that Ted Thompson has shown he's willing to use early picks on RBs...he just hasn't done so very effectively.

 

[tdmills]

And when has McCarthy shown that he can make a commitment to running the ball? Of course keeping a defense off the field can make them less tired but that still doesn't fix the huge flaws that the 49'ers exposed with their game plan.

He has at times shown he could...but never for more than a game or two at a time.

Exactly which is why he hasn't shown a commitment to running the ball. He loves to throw the ball and for the most part I don't have a problem with that. However, this season it was apparent the opposing defenses have adjusted to the Packers air attack and McCarthy has to make some adjustments for 2013. I would like to see that involved more running and drafting a good RB but Thompson hasn't shown he likes to use high draft picks for RBs.

Wouldn't a better RB make McCarthy more comfortable calling run plays as well? It works both ways here.

How much better can you be than 5yds/carry????

on 11 carries Kaepernick averaged over 10

Helllllloooooo....Exactly what we are saying. It's not the RB it's the commitment to the run.You just answered our argument.I swear, some people just argue to argue.

This doesn't mean Harris is a good RB. He's had 34 carries in the regular season 4.6 YPC and 28 carries in the postseason 3.6 YPC.vs Minny 17 carries 2.8 YPCvs SF 11 carries 4.8 YPCYou're telling me that:1) Harris was going to continue at that pace when he failed the week before?2) A better RB wouldn't have played better or encouraged McCarthy to run more often?It may be McCarthy, but I don't think he would only pass with even Cedric Benson(average RB) back there.

 

[sho nuff]

This doesn't mean Harris is a good RB. He's had 34 carries in the regular season 4.6 YPC and 28 carries in the postseason 3.6 YPC.vs Minny 17 carries 2.8 YPCvs SF 11 carries 4.8 YPCYou're telling me that:1) Harris was going to continue at that pace when he failed the week before?2) A better RB wouldn't have played better or encouraged McCarthy to run more often?It may be McCarthy, but I don't think he would only pass with even Cedric Benson(average RB) back there.

I think he is telling you that there was no committment to a run game that was working.What he did in Minny the week before was something different in that many of the runs were 2nd half runs to hold on to a 21 point lead...when a defense knows what is coming. Quite a bit different than 2nd half carries in a game the Packers trailed by only 3 at the half.McCarthy has done this even when Grant was playing well years ago. Its not a new thing to him because of personnel.

 

[Mr.Pack]

This doesn't mean Harris is a good RB. He's had 34 carries in the regular season 4.6 YPC and 28 carries in the postseason 3.6 YPC.

vs Minny 17 carries 2.8 YPC

vs SF 11 carries 4.8 YPC

You're telling me that:

1) Harris was going to continue at that pace when he failed the week before?

2) A better RB wouldn't have played better or encouraged McCarthy to run more often?

It may be McCarthy, but I don't think he would only pass with even Cedric Benson(average RB) back there.

I think he is telling you that there was no committment to a run game that was working.What he did in Minny the week before was something different in that many of the runs were 2nd half runs to hold on to a 21 point lead...when a defense knows what is coming. Quite a bit different than 2nd half carries in a game the Packers trailed by only 3 at the half.

McCarthy has done this even when Grant was playing well years ago. Its not a new thing to him because of personnel.

 

[tdmills]

This doesn't mean Harris is a good RB. He's had 34 carries in the regular season 4.6 YPC and 28 carries in the postseason 3.6 YPC.vs Minny 17 carries 2.8 YPCvs SF 11 carries 4.8 YPCYou're telling me that:1) Harris was going to continue at that pace when he failed the week before?2) A better RB wouldn't have played better or encouraged McCarthy to run more often?It may be McCarthy, but I don't think he would only pass with even Cedric Benson(average RB) back there.

I think he is telling you that there was no committment to a run game that was working.What he did in Minny the week before was something different in that many of the runs were 2nd half runs to hold on to a 21 point lead...when a defense knows what is coming. Quite a bit different than 2nd half carries in a game the Packers trailed by only 3 at the half.McCarthy has done this even when Grant was playing well years ago. Its not a new thing to him because of personnel.

I don't need a lesson in reading comprehension. I know what he's attempting to sell as the truth. I've indicated it may be truthful, but trying to look deeper.Vs Minnesota - Harris had 5 of his 17 carries in the second half

 

[sho nuff]

This doesn't mean Harris is a good RB. He's had 34 carries in the regular season 4.6 YPC and 28 carries in the postseason 3.6 YPC.vs Minny 17 carries 2.8 YPCvs SF 11 carries 4.8 YPCYou're telling me that:1) Harris was going to continue at that pace when he failed the week before?2) A better RB wouldn't have played better or encouraged McCarthy to run more often?It may be McCarthy, but I don't think he would only pass with even Cedric Benson(average RB) back there.

I think he is telling you that there was no committment to a run game that was working.What he did in Minny the week before was something different in that many of the runs were 2nd half runs to hold on to a 21 point lead...when a defense knows what is coming. Quite a bit different than 2nd half carries in a game the Packers trailed by only 3 at the half.McCarthy has done this even when Grant was playing well years ago. Its not a new thing to him because of personnel.

I don't need a lesson in reading comprehension. I know what he's attempting to sell as the truth. I've indicated it may be truthful, but trying to look deeper.Vs Minnesota - Harris had 5 of his 17 carries in the second half

You mean to tell me one week a run game does not do the same as it did the previous week?What he did against Minnesota has nothing to do with what he was doing against San Fran. Do you honestly think a coach watching a guy play...decides to go away from him because his ypc was down the week before?

 

[Carl Eller's Dead Liver]

This doesn't mean Harris is a good RB. He's had 34 carries in the regular season 4.6 YPC and 28 carries in the postseason 3.6 YPC.vs Minny 17 carries 2.8 YPCvs SF 11 carries 4.8 YPCYou're telling me that:1) Harris was going to continue at that pace when he failed the week before?2) A better RB wouldn't have played better or encouraged McCarthy to run more often?It may be McCarthy, but I don't think he would only pass with even Cedric Benson(average RB) back there.

I think he is telling you that there was no committment to a run game that was working.What he did in Minny the week before was something different in that many of the runs were 2nd half runs to hold on to a 21 point lead...when a defense knows what is coming. Quite a bit different than 2nd half carries in a game the Packers trailed by only 3 at the half.McCarthy has done this even when Grant was playing well years ago. Its not a new thing to him because of personnel.

I don't need a lesson in reading comprehension. I know what he's attempting to sell as the truth. I've indicated it may be truthful, but trying to look deeper.Vs Minnesota - Harris had 5 of his 17 carries in the second half

You mean to tell me one week a run game does not do the same as it did the previous week?What he did against Minnesota has nothing to do with what he was doing against San Fran. Do you honestly think a coach watching a guy play...decides to go away from him because his ypc was down the week before?

All I know is that David Wilson would have looked a lot better in mustard and puke green than Perry Riley did!

 

[Carl Eller's Dead Liver]

This doesn't mean Harris is a good RB. He's had 34 carries in the regular season 4.6 YPC and 28 carries in the postseason 3.6 YPC.vs Minny 17 carries 2.8 YPCvs SF 11 carries 4.8 YPCYou're telling me that:1) Harris was going to continue at that pace when he failed the week before?2) A better RB wouldn't have played better or encouraged McCarthy to run more often?It may be McCarthy, but I don't think he would only pass with even Cedric Benson(average RB) back there.

I think he is telling you that there was no committment to a run game that was working.What he did in Minny the week before was something different in that many of the runs were 2nd half runs to hold on to a 21 point lead...when a defense knows what is coming. Quite a bit different than 2nd half carries in a game the Packers trailed by only 3 at the half.McCarthy has done this even when Grant was playing well years ago. Its not a new thing to him because of personnel.

I don't need a lesson in reading comprehension. I know what he's attempting to sell as the truth. I've indicated it may be truthful, but trying to look deeper.Vs Minnesota - Harris had 5 of his 17 carries in the second half

You mean to tell me one week a run game does not do the same as it did the previous week?What he did against Minnesota has nothing to do with what he was doing against San Fran. Do you honestly think a coach watching a guy play...decides to go away from him because his ypc was down the week before?

All I know is that David Wilson would have looked a lot better in mustard and puke green than Perry Riley did!

 

[Rushmore]

This doesn't mean Harris is a good RB. He's had 34 carries in the regular season 4.6 YPC and 28 carries in the postseason 3.6 YPC.vs Minny 17 carries 2.8 YPCvs SF 11 carries 4.8 YPCYou're telling me that:1) Harris was going to continue at that pace when he failed the week before?2) A better RB wouldn't have played better or encouraged McCarthy to run more often?It may be McCarthy, but I don't think he would only pass with even Cedric Benson(average RB) back there.

I think he is telling you that there was no committment to a run game that was working.What he did in Minny the week before was something different in that many of the runs were 2nd half runs to hold on to a 21 point lead...when a defense knows what is coming. Quite a bit different than 2nd half carries in a game the Packers trailed by only 3 at the half.McCarthy has done this even when Grant was playing well years ago. Its not a new thing to him because of personnel.

I don't need a lesson in reading comprehension. I know what he's attempting to sell as the truth. I've indicated it may be truthful, but trying to look deeper.Vs Minnesota - Harris had 5 of his 17 carries in the second half

You mean to tell me one week a run game does not do the same as it did the previous week?What he did against Minnesota has nothing to do with what he was doing against San Fran. Do you honestly think a coach watching a guy play...decides to go away from him because his ypc was down the week before?

All I know is that David Wilson would have looked a lot better in mustard and puke green than Perry Riley did!

 

[tdmills]

This doesn't mean Harris is a good RB. He's had 34 carries in the regular season 4.6 YPC and 28 carries in the postseason 3.6 YPC.vs Minny 17 carries 2.8 YPCvs SF 11 carries 4.8 YPCYou're telling me that:1) Harris was going to continue at that pace when he failed the week before?2) A better RB wouldn't have played better or encouraged McCarthy to run more often?It may be McCarthy, but I don't think he would only pass with even Cedric Benson(average RB) back there.

I think he is telling you that there was no committment to a run game that was working.What he did in Minny the week before was something different in that many of the runs were 2nd half runs to hold on to a 21 point lead...when a defense knows what is coming. Quite a bit different than 2nd half carries in a game the Packers trailed by only 3 at the half.McCarthy has done this even when Grant was playing well years ago. Its not a new thing to him because of personnel.

I don't need a lesson in reading comprehension. I know what he's attempting to sell as the truth. I've indicated it may be truthful, but trying to look deeper.Vs Minnesota - Harris had 5 of his 17 carries in the second half

You mean to tell me one week a run game does not do the same as it did the previous week?What he did against Minnesota has nothing to do with what he was doing against San Fran. Do you honestly think a coach watching a guy play...decides to go away from him because his ypc was down the week before?

It has everything to do in defining if the RB is competent or not(the whole discussion is a better RB would've helped). If Daniel Thomas suddenly averages 7 YPC on a several carries in one game, would you think it's an outlier to his 3 YPC in his career average? Of course you would. If one player plays lights out, the coach will look to incorporate them more the next week(see Victor Cruz/Arian Foster or any other out of nowhere player). On the contrary, if a player averages 2 YPC, the coach will probably hesitate to use him as much the next week(Harris in the playoffs).vs SF(Harris' yards on each attempt)Drive one-No carriesDrive two- 2, 7, 4, 5, 18(td)Drive three- 2, 3Drive four- 3, 3Drive five- 3, 3What makes you think he will be successful when his last 6 carries were for 3 yards or less?

 

[sho nuff]

This doesn't mean Harris is a good RB. He's had 34 carries in the regular season 4.6 YPC and 28 carries in the postseason 3.6 YPC.vs Minny 17 carries 2.8 YPCvs SF 11 carries 4.8 YPCYou're telling me that:1) Harris was going to continue at that pace when he failed the week before?2) A better RB wouldn't have played better or encouraged McCarthy to run more often?It may be McCarthy, but I don't think he would only pass with even Cedric Benson(average RB) back there.

I think he is telling you that there was no committment to a run game that was working.What he did in Minny the week before was something different in that many of the runs were 2nd half runs to hold on to a 21 point lead...when a defense knows what is coming. Quite a bit different than 2nd half carries in a game the Packers trailed by only 3 at the half.McCarthy has done this even when Grant was playing well years ago. Its not a new thing to him because of personnel.

I don't need a lesson in reading comprehension. I know what he's attempting to sell as the truth. I've indicated it may be truthful, but trying to look deeper.Vs Minnesota - Harris had 5 of his 17 carries in the second half

You mean to tell me one week a run game does not do the same as it did the previous week?What he did against Minnesota has nothing to do with what he was doing against San Fran. Do you honestly think a coach watching a guy play...decides to go away from him because his ypc was down the week before?

It has everything to do in defining if the RB is competent or not(the whole discussion is a better RB would've helped). If Daniel Thomas suddenly averages 7 YPC on a several carries in one game, would you think it's an outlier to his 3 YPC in his career average? Of course you would. If one player plays lights out, the coach will look to incorporate them more the next week(see Victor Cruz/Arian Foster or any other out of nowhere player). On the contrary, if a player averages 2 YPC, the coach will probably hesitate to use him as much the next week(Harris in the playoffs).vs SF(Harris' yards on each attempt)Drive one-No carriesDrive two- 2, 7, 4, 5, 18(td)Drive three- 2, 3Drive four- 3, 3Drive five- 3, 3What makes you think he will be successful when his last 6 carries were for 3 yards or less?

The previous game is now a way to determine if an RB is competent or not? And again...this goes back with McCarthy...its not just Harris that he has done this with.And wow...you mean to tell me that a RB's ypc number will be skewed higher by a longer run in the middle of it?And vs. Min...9 of his carries came in the 2nd half.3 on the first drive (and 2 receptions on that TD drive)Now look at SF.3rd quarter...pretty important here as they were down just 3 points2 runs on the first drive then sacked (runs got them a 3rd and 4...so while you want to complain about 3 yards per carry, with Rodgers, 3rd and 4 should hardly be a big concern).Next drive...0 carries...pass happy again, but finally got Cobb involved on 2 runs. Drive ended in a FG that tied the game.Give up a TD drive...followed up with a pass happy drive with the only run being one by Rodgers. Punt...and from that point the game starts getting out of hand.So what you are telling me...is his yards per carry last week, plus his last 6 carries is what McCarthy was thinking when Harris did not touch the ball again the rest of the game(other than a 5 yard pass late) after the opening drive of the 3rd quarter?Most sane people will tell you that you are crazy...in fact, several Packer fans are telling you just that.