Packers a Running Team? Now That's Culture Shock!

For Green Bay fans this will take some getting used to.

You're pulling my leg, right? The Packers are going to be a running team? Our Packers? The team of Brett Favre and Aaron Rodgers is going to commit to handing the ball off? The proud franchise that brought you Sterling Sharpe, Antonio Freeman, Donald Driver, Robert Brooks, Jordy Nelson and Davonte Adams is transforming into three yards and a cloud of dust?

Wow. That's going to take some getting used to.   

Believe it. It's happening. The 2020 draft confirms it. A running back, a blocking H-back, three offensive linemen and no receivers. That, my friend, is the draft of a team that wants to run the ball.......early and often.

Matt LaFleur and Brian Gutenkunst have decided that the best way to play defense is to keep your offense on the field. Long, ball control drives featuring lots of running plays.

More and more across the NFL coaches are realizing that, with the rules making it so tough to play effective defense, it makes more sense to play keepaway. Teams like the 49ers, the Seahawks and the Titans are showing the way. That's where Green Bay is headed.

With back to back Hall of Fame quarterbacks, the Packers have understandably been a passing team for decades. In fact, you can make the case that anyone under the age of 50 was not even alive when Green Bay last had a consistently successful run-first team. You have to go back to the Lombardi glory years to find Packer teams that grinded you down all day long with the likes of Jim Taylor, Paul Hornung, Elijah Pitts, Donny Anderson, Travis Williams and Jim Grabowski.

During the five NFL championship seasons the Packers played in the 1960's, they ran the ball an average of 474 times per season, while throwing the ball an average of just 314 times.

Flash forward to modern day. You have to go back 16 years to find a season in which Green Bay ran the ball more often than they threw it. That was 2003 when coach Mike Sherman unleashed the three-headed rushing monster of Ahman Green, who set the single season rushing record of 1,883 yards, Najeh Davenport (420 yds) and Tony Fisher (200 yds). That is the only time this century Green Bay was a legitimate running team.

From 2016 through the 2018 season, Mike McCarthy's Packers never ran the ball more than 386 times. The record during those three seasons was 10-6, 7-9, and 6-9-1. The rushing attempts hit basement level in McCarthy's last year (2018) at just 333, while throwing the ball a whopping 640 times. It should be pointed out the Packers were playing from behind much of that year. Every week at his press gatherings,McCarthy would say that he wants to run the ball more, but his teams never seemed to commit to it.

The trend changed immediately with the coming of Matt LaFleur in 2019. Green Bay ran the ball 411 times, the most since 2015, while throwing it on 573 plays. It's clear LaFleur wants those figures even more balanced.

Interestingly, the correlation between running the ball more and winning is not always consistent. In 2013 Green Bay ran the ball 459 times for 2,136 yards. In this century those totals are second only to that banner year of 2003. Yet the Packers record was a modest 8-7-1. In 2008, Rodgers first year as a starter, the Packers ran the rock 437 times, third highest since then, but the record was 6-10.

And you don't have to run the ball to win, as Green Bay demonstrated with its bombs-away offense in 2011, during which they threw the ball 552 times, compared to 395 rushes, and finished 15-1.

Bear in mind that it's one thing to say you want to run the ball more, but it's quite another thing to actually be good enough to do it. One of the most frustrating things for me as I watch Packer games is seeing our team get stuffed regularly on third and one, or 4th and one. You have to wonder if we have the offensive line to pull this off. 2019 was encouraging. It helps to have a slasher type running back like Aaron Jones who can find the crease and explode through it. The hope is that power backs Jamal Williams and newcomer A.J. Dillon can provide the short yardage on the big boy downs. Keep those chains moving. Run down that clock.

One big plus is the Packers still have Aaron Rodgers, who is going to demand the defense's respect off the play action fake. A solid run game should suck the linebackers and safeties in and open up some big play opportunities downfield.

All in all, it's going to be fun to watch this transition take place. Here's hoping the Pack can run to daylight like those legendary teams of the 60's.......and maybe bring back another Lombardi trophy or two.

-----------------------------------

Ken Lass is a former Green Bay television sports anchor and 43 year media veteran, a lifelong Packers fan, and a shareholder.

NFL Categories: 
11 points

Comments (42)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
Since91's picture

May 10, 2020 at 06:35 pm

Play action is the new trend! Looking at the 2019 stats Jimmy G has the second most play action passing yards (1,438) behind J Goff (1,564). I would like to think A-Rod is way better than Jimmy G at playing QB. Rodgers had only 966 yards off of play action on 135 attempts last year. Which is not top 10. If he can get that up to around 1,400-1,500 that would definitely increase the output of their passing O. By the way Tannehill had 1,095 yards on only 84 attempts last year. Rodgers is better than him too!

+ REPLY
6 points
7
1
canadapacker's picture

May 10, 2020 at 07:28 pm

I guess writers got to write. Even if it is a bunch of overexaggeration - or oversimplification. The Packers drafted the best players available. The need for some O lineman was obvious as some guys were getting long in the tooth and the loss of Spriggs so that was the only position of need. I kind of like the draft after getting over the shock of Love. But again the best player available at their spot 30. If you look at the older drafts even with the great TT, there were a lot of misses. Dont forget the Brian Brohm in the second round as the supposed back up for AR - was beat out. The Packers have a development QB in Love and hopefully AR does not get hurt because we know what happens when that happens. We have not really had a backup since Flynn and even his second stint was a flop. Hundley didnt do it and he was supposed to be a great choice even though a 5th rounder but in MM's supposed QB school. I expect to see a more balanced offense. Everything is predicated on not having injuries and a running back is only one play away from IR. So the fact that we drafted a big Tight end and a crusher of a running back will make sure that we dont need to pass it on 3rd and 1 or 2. So I would hope for a more balanced attack but I would think that it is a real exaggeration to say that we are now a running team and not a passing team.

+ REPLY
-4 points
6
10
Stroh's picture

May 10, 2020 at 08:13 pm

What are you talking about? Flynn's 2nd tour in GB kept the Packers in the playoffs! He went 3-2-1 IIRC and the Packers had a shot at the playoffs when Rodgers returned at the end of the season and subesquently lost to Carolina and then didn't play since they were out of the playoffs! Flynn kept the Packers alive!

I guess commenters need to over-exaggerate and write something just to write, even if its WRONG!

+ REPLY
-2 points
5
7
canadapacker's picture

May 10, 2020 at 09:49 pm

OK - you must have a bad memory or did not do the homework - So before you insult me do the online homework and you would have found out that Hundley was the QB when AR came back and lost to Carolina.

When Flynn was playing they made the playoffs despite Tolzein and Flynn - Flynn beat a weak Atlanta team by 1 point in GB and had a good game against a weak Dallas team and if it wasnt for Lacy 145 yard game they might not have won that game but only by 1 point - but a win is a win. But Flynn did not play that well

+ REPLY
3 points
4
1
Stroh's picture

May 11, 2020 at 12:39 am

That it was the wrong year was my mistake, but the FACT remains that when Flynn returned to the Packers Tolzien had not won a game! He might have put up some numbers, but numbers don't decide if a QB can LEAD his team. Tolzien was a failure even if he had some numbers and no matter Flynn's numbers he LED his team to some wins! In the game that both played vs Minn that ended in a tie Tolzien was 7-17 0 and 0. Flynn came in and got the Packers a tie vs Minn by LEADING his team going 21-36 1TD. Tolzien started 2 games and threw 5 INT's. Which largely explains why he couldn't Win. Tolzien had Lacy for the games he started too, but still didn't win. Winning is what matters is it not?

Flynn knew how to Win, Tolzien knew only Losing!

So mistake on the Carolina is mine, but the Fact still stands the Flynn LED his teams to wins that kept them in the playoffs, while Tolzien did not! He can only play the teams on the schedule and he did the job!

+ REPLY
-2 points
2
4
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

May 11, 2020 at 03:36 am

No: GB did not draft the best players available.
No: the O-line wasn't the only position of need.

I don't mean to insult by flatly contradicting you. Best player available could use defining, for example, but there were more talented prospects at positions of need available at 62 and certainly at 94.

The O-line has five reasonable starters. Maybe even a decent back up or perhaps two. ILB, DL, WR, TE (though I am willing to roll the dice on Sternberger) and WR were/are short on starters.

+ REPLY
2 points
3
1
canadapacker's picture

May 11, 2020 at 09:07 am

I must admit that the best player available is always what a team says that they take. Unless we can see their draft board and rankings we will never know. Oline is always a slow process and we got lucky last year with Jenkins coming in and playing that well. Since we lost 2 guys one starter and one development guy we needed backups despite the free agent. I am assuming that the oline guys were ranked higher than the potential ILB guys available also considering what's on the team. But we hopefully will never have to see these guys play this season except preseason. I also think that the D is going to see much different alignments this year now that Martinez doesn't have to be on the field all of the time.

+ REPLY
1 points
2
1
Coldworld's picture

May 11, 2020 at 09:33 am

How can you say that BPA isn’t defined and also say categorically that they did not take the best players available?

I would wager that in their minds they took the best players available in the context of what they believe would most greatly benefit the team.

The concept of benefit may be broader than this year. I think we see that with Love and last year with Gary. But for them it’s not just picking for the team, but for their careers. Seems pretty far fetched to assume otherwise.

To the extent we can discern it, it is more than fair to doubt their plan and whether a given player was the best option in that context, but this refrain that they avoided picking players who could make a bigger overall positive impact in their assessment leaves me nonplussed.

+ REPLY
5 points
7
2
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

May 12, 2020 at 03:58 am

Easily and with a clear conscience (LOL), leaving the caveat that the definition matters. Voila! You immediately changed the definition from the normally accepted one (take the prospect most likely to have a long and lucrative NFL career - and if it's close take positional value and need into account) to taking the player who might most benefit the team. That's a nice way of putting it, but I read it as drafting primarily for need. LaFleur needs an H-Back, so GB reached on Degaura.

I think LT Lucas Niang (96th pick) is more likely to have a long and lucrative career than Degaura. I think he has more talent than Degaura. I think his position has more value. I think Niang will play many more snaps and make many millions more than Degaura.

I have a hard time using a 3rd whose ceiling is 500 snaps per year. If LaFleur does not show that he has the Shanahan touch, the new coach would know what to do with a LT, but have little use for an H-Back.

As for Dillon, I love BDU, but I'd have preferred Chinn, Josh Jones, Bryan Edwards, Madabuike, Gallimore, Cushenberry, or (risking some red flags that I didn't pay enough attention to in the articles and scouting reports) Willie Gay. At least I think Dillon can be a starting RB in the NFL (though thinking he isn't Eddie Lacey).

We've been knocking heads on this issue for a while now. I'm reminded of Churchill's speech: we will spar in the comments, and we shall never surrender [at least until couple of years pass by and hindsight brings more clarity].

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
flackcatcher's picture

May 12, 2020 at 04:45 pm

I still think this draft is odd. While many expected core players now, Gute went drafting for developmental players. It was a totally different draft than what many observers thought would happen. The culture shock for was too great for some. Me. I was LOLing from beginning to end. Gute is taking one heck of a gamble. If wrong, he has set back the organization for three, maybe five years in terms of player development. But if he is right, then the Packers will be an elite team in the league for the next decade at minimum. (By odd I think the brain trust at 1265 had already scrapped the upcoming season. At best, they may look upon it as some kind of preseason if played at all)

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
The_Justicar's picture

May 11, 2020 at 08:13 pm

I stopped reading this post after “the packers drafted the best players available “. Good one! That was funny.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Stroh's picture

May 10, 2020 at 08:05 pm

Apparently the author missed the dominant reign Ahman Green had in GB! How the hell is that possible? The Packers when Green was at RB were a dominant running team and pushed Favre into game manager role. From '00 thru '04 Ahman had more rushing yards than anyone in the NFL. In '03 he had the greatest rushing season of anyone in Packer history and as a team the Packers ran the ball over 50% of the offensive snaps!

+ REPLY
2 points
7
5
murf7777's picture

May 10, 2020 at 08:20 pm

Favre, game manager?,, now that made me fall off my chair with tears in my eyes. Your right they were dominate run team with Green in his prime.

+ REPLY
0 points
2
2
Cubbygold's picture

May 10, 2020 at 08:36 pm

Unless the author went back and edited the article, it appears he did not miss it at all...

You have to go back 16 years to find a season in which Green Bay ran the ball more often than they threw it. That was 2003 when coach Mike Sherman unleashed the three-headed rushing monster of Ahman Green, who set the single season rushing record of 1,883 yards, Najeh Davenport (420 yds) and Tony Fisher (200 yds). That is the only time this century Green Bay was a legitimate running team.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Stroh's picture

May 10, 2020 at 10:31 pm

He lost me at "In fact, you can make the case that anyone under the age of 50 was not even alive when Green Bay last had a consistently successful run-first team. You have to go back to the Lombardi glory years to find Packer teams that grinded you down all day long with the likes of Jim Taylor, Paul Hornung, Elijah Pitts, Donny Anderson, Travis Williams and Jim Grabowski."

I quite reading at that point. Don't know if he changed it, I doubt it, but he was overlooking Ahman's greatness. The teams that had Ahman and Favre, really were mostly running teams.

+ REPLY
-2 points
1
3
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

May 11, 2020 at 04:22 am

Since the author defined his terms, I am content. I don't know how I'd define "legitimate running team" but I don't think I would require more rushing attempts than passing attempts. I suppose I'd require an above average yards/carry and a good power rush percentage from FO.

GB ran the ball 44.6% of the time in 2001, 43.74% in 2002: I'd consider both teams to have had legitimate running games in those years. MN ran the ball 50.5% of the time and SF ran it 51.02% of the time, and Arizona ran more than they passed in 2019. Indy passed more than they ran, but it has a legitimate running game, IMO.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
jannes bjornson's picture

May 11, 2020 at 08:08 pm

Four yards and a sherman timeout. How many SB appearances?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
murf7777's picture

May 10, 2020 at 08:16 pm

Proving you can run is very important so you keep the D honest. If Green Bay runs the ball at a high level, top 5 in the league, I would predict Arod will be in serious contention for MVP, if not a lock, it will be like shooting fish in a barrel for him.

+ REPLY
6 points
6
0
taarons420's picture

May 10, 2020 at 09:19 pm

I love the Packers and I love Aaron Rodgers.... but his MVP days are long gone.
He will never again be the best Qb, let alone best overall player, in the league.
He's fine - he's just no longer great.

Hopefully this new offense will cover his drop in ability.

+ REPLY
1 points
6
5
canadapacker's picture

May 10, 2020 at 10:32 pm

AR - made some fantastic throws again in 2019 - just look online for his 10 best throws but I agree he was a little bit inconsistent - especially with his dump offs and short throw misses. He also made some throws not quite on target - for example on the wrong side of the player - or too high or behind the player to make a catch and run. But that is not because of skill deterioration as much as a lack of both mental and physical preparation IMO. I hope that this offseason allows him to make some physical conditioning despite the COVID issues.

+ REPLY
-2 points
2
4
jannes bjornson's picture

May 11, 2020 at 08:18 pm

They dropped around five of his TD passes last season. Scrub talk once again after wasting draft capital to restock the 2015-18 misses. A power runner was on the wish list and they bagged the best one in the draft. A guy capable of pass pro and catching the ball out of the backfield and TE positioning; bagged one of the most versatile players in college football. Love will shine in 3-4 years no need to whine and cry working on a heart attack. Rodgers will be around until he hits 39-40.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Stroh's picture

May 10, 2020 at 11:01 pm

Generally agree, but I'm hold out hope that drafting Love will light a fire under Rodgers to take his game back to his MVP levels. This might plant a mountain sized chip on his shoulder to push him back to that level when he was the best QB in the NFL.

+ REPLY
-1 points
2
3
murf7777's picture

May 12, 2020 at 06:54 am

I would agree it is rare for an older player to achieve that...Brady did it in 2017 around the age of 40. Aaron was in the talks during part the last year as a serious candidate.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

May 11, 2020 at 11:09 am

No playoff team ran the football on first down LESS than the Packers did in 2019 (27.8%). This was 22nd in the league with regard to run play calls on first down. (FWIW, New Orleans, was 21st at 28.1%)

So, for a team whose run calls were middle of the pack overall, with a strong winning record, that wants to be a "run-first" team, why would they choose to run so infrequently on the down circumstances control least...first down?

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
Leatherhead's picture

May 11, 2020 at 02:12 pm

I have the answer.

It’s easier to throw against the base, first down, defense, and it’s easier to run against the sub packages.

Additionally, we threw some passes on first down that were essentially “long handoffs”

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

May 12, 2020 at 07:37 pm

It is easier for every team to throw against the base, 1st down defense. Since it is a comparative stat, I don't think this explains anything.

Good stats by dobber, BTW.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
ShooterMcGee's picture

May 11, 2020 at 06:41 am

It will be interesting to see who runs the ball more, us or our opponents. We may have the worst run defense in the league. Last year we were 31st against the run with no serious upgrades this year. I don't know why such an apparent weakness was not addressed in the off season. The nightmare of getting rolled over by the 49ers again is all to real. Then there's Dalvin Cook, D'Andre Swift, and David Montgomery we will have to try to stop. Yikes! It will be our Achilles heel.

+ REPLY
2 points
3
1
mnbadger's picture

May 11, 2020 at 07:52 am

Running to score touchdowns will force opponents to pass to catch up. That plays to our defensive strengths. Sounds obvious, but we have to generate touchdowns or our defensemay get rolled again.

+ REPLY
6 points
7
1
jannes bjornson's picture

May 11, 2020 at 08:23 pm

Score fast and frequently, then you can try to play ball control. With this defense you have to give them a big cushion.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Handsback's picture

May 11, 2020 at 09:18 am

In 2011 Green Bay had a tremendous passing attack. Only two teams could possibly stop them...the Chiefs and themselves. It seems that every since that time they (the Packers) have been trying to duplicate the 2011 results.
We could also say that since 2011 the Packers have also tried to build their defense so that their passing attack could win another SB. It's been close a couple of times but when you depend on finesse....the smallest hiccup can derail the team. Something happens to the QB, a WR get hurt, the OTs get too banged up to provide enough protection.
The running game, on the other hand, SEEMS (a big seems) to provide a larger margin of error. If QB gets hurt run the ball more, WR get hurt, you can still run the ball, if OTs get slowed down, they can be replaced by IOL that can run block. Look a couple of seasons ago when the Packers had a UDFA guard playing OT and he played well. The running game seems to allow the offense to keep clicking even with issues of injury.
The defense of the Packers, a different story. I don't see a defense that can win a SB yet. I see some swag from the OLBs, but I don't see urgency getting the opponent off the field on third down. Maybe they need the another year with this group to train and learn the Pettine system in order to play a complete game. I don't know.
Whatever Ken says about this team there appears to be one solid truth...they are going to be a running team.

+ REPLY
4 points
4
0
Leatherhead's picture

May 11, 2020 at 09:43 am

You don’t need to be a genius to figure this out.

Go to pro-football-reference. Go to 2019 offensive stats. Sort by rushing attempts. The Packers were 13th, after being 32nd in 2018.

The playoff teams are all at the top. New Orleans had a few less attempts, and KC was 23rd or so. An outlier. An Anomaly.

Teams don’t have a lot of attempts because they’re running out the clock; they have a lot of attempts because they’re good at it and they stick with it.

If you want to make the playoffs, it really helps to be an above average running team. It also has the benefits of keeping your QB healthy and your defense off the field.

I’m pretty sure we’ll throw more than we pass this year, but it’s going to be more balanced. As the saying goes .....run more, pass less.

+ REPLY
1 points
3
2
OldPacker's picture

May 11, 2020 at 11:14 am

if they want to extend AR playing career they better run the ball

+ REPLY
4 points
4
0
Leatherhead's picture

May 11, 2020 at 12:58 pm

They want him to stay healthy for two more years. Rodgers as our starter at 40 is a fairy tale.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
gkarl's picture

May 11, 2020 at 11:17 am

Its hard to win in the NFL being to one dimensional run or pass. Most teams lean slightly one way or the other and a particular game/opponent may dictate some deviation from there normal pattern but your personnel and system should determine which you favor.

Like it or not the Packers seem to be in transition to a more run based offense then during the MM era. Is it the system, the personnel or both leading the team in this direction, I'm not sure, but it does appear they have a plan and I'm really looking forward to watching it unfold.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
PhantomII's picture

May 11, 2020 at 12:57 pm

ML offense wants parity 50/50 run pass keeping other team guessing more besides down and distance obvious results. I don't think we'll see multiple WR's making 10 mill plus money like before. This system will cost less cap space than our old 4-WR spread offense with left/right tackles making bank and holding off defenders 5-7 seconds. The teams they go up against will dictate the game plan. The TE group will increase the short / mid passing game more soon. I like getting the ball to RB's from the slot. They have elite vision to know how to make people miss. I hope that becomes an every down threat. ML offense is now in 2nd year and he didn't install a hurry up offense last year. That is a critical piece to any offense and something Rodgers excels at. We need either an elite slot WR or an xtra RB in the slot to make this thing go and do the most damage to the other team. With all the weapons we have including the young TE's we will be able to attack teams from any position. We are a better team this year. Like I posted before it is a more QB friendly offense than before (less pressure). You won't need an as elite QB to run it well.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
jannes bjornson's picture

May 11, 2020 at 08:34 pm

Every Game Plan is different, or should be. If your opponent is weak vs the pass then air it out 60 times and get the TDs. If they can mix it up then play the counter game. Ask Belichick if he wants to hit certain "targets" like Muc Carthy babbled about. Design the weekly formula to win.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
TheVOR's picture

May 11, 2020 at 12:41 pm

The Fans shouldn't buy into this. The Packers have a HOF QB, a Statistical "Re definer" at the position. They need to run the ball very effectively when they choose to. That doesn't mean they're becoming a run first team, nor are they built like one.

They need to be highly effective when they run, and Rodgers needs to buy into "less instant gratification long ball TD's", and more into, I'm completing 70% of the passes I do throw, not turning the ball over (there is a no INT season out there) to keep the chains moving, eat the clock, and win football games and Super Bowls. I swear, if Rodgers bought into it, 100%, this team would be the Patriots for 3 years.

This team needs a dominant mix of Pass and run, and needs to execute. DO YOUR JOB!!!! Do it well, the Packers win Super Bowls.

+ REPLY
7 points
8
1
Leatherhead's picture

May 11, 2020 at 03:52 pm

I think that with Lewis,Deguera, Jones and Dillon we’re built for running. And Turner and Wagner are better at run blocking than pass blocking.

+ REPLY
1 points
2
1
PhantomII's picture

May 12, 2020 at 06:27 pm

Rodgers is who he is. He doesn't throw it up for grabs but if you throw it out of bounds a punter kicks it and minus field position same as an INT. I think QB's should have a negative stat for throwing it out. Usually someone was open and the QB missed his opportunity...Running it keeps him from holding it too long and having a collar bone snapped a 3rd time. Basically we tried it his way and for several reasons it don't work. He looked pathetic against SF. Maybe Love stokes a fire we have not seen in years, we can only hope. Running it moves the chains, opens up the pass and makes the Defense tired. All good things

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Villapp's picture

May 11, 2020 at 01:13 pm

That`s very interesting!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
flackcatcher's picture

May 11, 2020 at 05:04 pm

Two points. One, is the extant injuries forced changes in the offensive scheme during the 2016-2018 seasons. Even during the 2015 season, the RB room was down to one healthy player forcing Green Bay to convert WR Ty Mo into a RB. Two, is the disconnect between Rodgers and McCarthy on the game plan, and the running game itself. That was a long standing issue between them which surfaced during the 2013 season. There were points early in the last season, before going more spread, that Rodgers was dressed down by MLF for checking out of run formations on called plays or RPO. Also, like Brett Favre before him, Rodgers now likes to throw the long ones every chance he gets. (Like McCarthy, a long standing issue that MLF will have to deal with)

+ REPLY
1 points
2
1
samwil's picture

May 11, 2020 at 11:28 pm

Culture shock can be a big influence on the whole team's performance.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0

Log in to comment and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.