Great job Dusty. I appreciate your effort to put all of this together for us and share it with us. Looking forward to the future editions. I think it's great information that will help all of us expand our knowledge of the Packers offense. Thanks, Since '61

Man, this is going to be incredible. Even just the raw data here is fascinating. I'd be very interested in comparing the down and distance data specifically to other teams in the league. Was really expecting way more verts on third and short, haha.

This is great for me, Dusty. I understand the concepts but the play calls on a sheet like this helps to see a game plan. This is going to be a fun spring class for me!

Doesn't Look like Hero Ball to me.

Wow, Dusty, you really know how to make a grand reentrance. This delicious brain food is just what I needed to help shepherd me through our long dark tea time of the soul.

Pro Tip: holding the call sheet in front of your mouth while enthusiastically discussing it with your spouse *will* eventually prod them to use colorful language.

Seems like the Packers might be able to use you in the organization. Great work.

I wish we had a larger sample size under Jordan at this point. *This data really aids in knowing what worked and what didn't. Very cool.

This is my 2 cents.

First this makes me think of the two issues with defense currently, because we always seem to fill that gap first each year, and I hope that's not the case again.
The need is to have someone in place for Gary. I still think this draft is stacked for that, and we can even look to FA if need be. Then the Amos/Safety problem. In Barry's unique defense, nickel wasn't usually played as much as other teams last year, and Amos filled that wide LB/Safety position when we had out wide edges. Barry moved Amos more to the outside, which I think made sense but that might be why the Packers weren't so desperate to get him back (along with the resigning of Hollins). I know a lot of drafts out there have Brian Branch playing this role, however if we see the same unique look of those heavy and light approaches to the two and three wide receiver looks (that are the majority in the NFL currently); I would put almost more emphasis on looking for an agile linebacker. I want someone taller than 6 foot who can move. Someone to pair with Walker/Campbell on the outside positions. To me Drew Sanders is the only LB who makes sense for this. He is only going up in progress each year, 235, and *6'4. - w/ the highest combine score overall. I have no idea what picks we are going to have in the draft, but early 2nd and this guy is gone. You can still run the wide edge w/ someone like Nick Herbig. I think Sanders and Herbig would be a unique combination to allow a fast pass rush and tall LB in the back who can trail TE or boot/mills routes with great effectiveness. And then we are not wasting capital on just the "sack the QB" emphasis. I'd rather see an adaptable 4-3/5-2/4-2 def with Douglas and Alexander. Sanders can still rush the QB as well.

This leaves the 1st round pick and the needs to fill in offense. I don't think WR is a major need, because there is great talent late second and early third rounds (Mims/Wilson). We have Bo Melton and Toure who may be able to step up. And if we need a veteran to fill a hole, FA is a last resort option. And yes, we need a TE, but everyone knows this - it just depends what we want this TE to do - and that's if they can translate to NFL speed week 1. There is only one way around this. New scheme for the offense.
I can't understand why more teams with the speed on the outside, don't use big dawgs like Dillon to block more. This is someone who can pick up more momentum to either help create a hole, or help protect the passer. We saw some of this last year (using WR like Cobb and TE like Deguara), but we don't have to be so worried about spending a 1st rounder on that position. Sure, you can still have a really good TE like Musgrave/Washington for a pick up who can do it all hopefully, but how the offense has been successful on third downs is that, "stretch the defense" approach. The data above shows we were more effective to the outside and with power runs.
3rd down go to plays above: *Verts/Mills/Drives/Boot/Post/Screen, and #1 being the Fade routes. Watson changed entirely what was possible when he stepped on the field. This can force more nickel/dime packages which help our run game. But how can we continue to open up our successful plays on the outside, AND create momentum to effectively run up the middle? Because last year, we only had 4.2 yards per carry with Dillon (37th overall) and Jones who had a lot more success (wide zone a lot) at 5.3 (6th overall).

This is why another RB who can do it all makes the most sense. Bijan priority - maybe Tyjae Spears later on. Spears, I compare to Pollard and Bijan to McCaffrey. No offense is really doing something to this effect, because Deebo (the closest I can think of) is a weird combo of a jet sweeper who can catch. If we do that to someone as tall as Watson (not someone with a low center of gravity), I worry about the longevity of Watson for GB then. He is most valuable down the field. Keeping Watson where just the "look" helps us, will help defenses second guess more often if we have a similar threat for up the middle/drop passes beyond the D line, w/ Dillon combos. Get another utility knife that you can just confuse the crap out of defenses with, and go from there.

Do we really need to put an emphasis on a TE/Oline at first go, or could Dillon help here if schemed differently? I thought he was a great blocker last year for Aaron. Full potential for Dillon may be more of a traditional old school FB approach imo. And you can still run power options for Dillon like we did where Davis and Deguara helped him plow into the end zone.

Dusty, wow a lot of hard work breaking down plays types verses down & distance. One statistical subset of importance that you may never find is the # of each play type verses down/distance audibled to by one, Aaron Charles Rodgers. If you have his cell phone #, perhaps he will answer your call?? He will know. I'm certain MLF knows as well.

This is good info and it does make me wonder who else can hear the play calls and are they recalling what is working in-game or maybe seeing something that caught the other team off guard to capitalize upon. Our in-game adjustments are mostly poor offense/defense . I also hope this is being done for defense side of the ball for adjustments also. It almost seems these play-results are tabulated post game instead of during. I have seen us make headway running the ball....and then completely give it up and start passing for 3 N outs. Thoughts???

In awe Dusty! Really appreciate the time & work you put in this!

Dusty, thank you for all of your insightful observations....

All credits Dusty! I know it was huge work and time you invested in that. Therefore, I can only promise I will reading every piece you will posted here on the subject!

Too much offense and you’re spending time practicing entirely too many plays, hindering your effectiveness of the plays you’re actually going to run. It’s good to be prepared, but you can’t realistically prepare for every single possible situation without taking time away from drilling down into the finer points of a key play you are actually going to run."

This comment is very intuitive regarding offense success. For instance, the Air Raid system focuses on very few plays and make sure that they practice, practice till near perfection, similar to Vince Lombardi sweep. Hal Mumme the inventor of the Air Raid system actually didn't have a playbook for his players because he honed it to 20 or so plays and kept it simple.

It will be exciting to see Phil Longo's version of the Air Raid system at WI this year.

Waiting with anticipation on the next post. Thank you Dusty.

Wow! Thorough and exhaustive!
So, Dusty, how do you respond to “GB is so predictable”?
As well as my new favorite “The playcalling sucks”?

Thank you!

Post: "Time to trust Love"--200 fan responses

Post: "What will Packers do at backup QB?" -- 150 responses

Post: "Call Sheet" with actual Packer football game information -- 21 responses