Should the Packers be Running the Ball More?

 

    Matt LaFleur needs to call more runs! Why did we resign Aaron Jones just to not use him? Dillon is averaging 5 yards a carry! Feed them the ball!

    I've heard the calls from Packers fans. I'm sure you have too. Maybe you've been advocating for a heavier dose of the running game yourself. Honestly, I understand it. The offense of the 2021 Green Bay Packers has struggled at multiple points throughout this season. It's frustrating to watch an offense that was so explosive and efficient last year stall out and punt. AJ Dillon and Aaron Jones are both likable, effective, dynamic players. It sure seems like an infusion of the run would help solve some of the offense's woes, mitigate the effects of a pieced-together offensive line, and protect Aaron Rodgers. 

    However, I'm not sure it's that simple. I think that the problems that have prevented the Packers offense from reaching the heights that it did in 2020 are more complicated, and I hope that I can try to illuminate some of these issues here.

    First of all, is it even true that the Packers are running it less than they should? It may be impossible to measure how much rushing volume is "right" for an offense, but we can at least compare this year's statistics with what the Packers did last year as the top offense in the league. Using the data from Pro Football Reference, we can see that the 2020 Packers ran a total of 990 offensive plays. By my math, 384 of these plays were designed runs by a RB. That's 39% of total plays. The rest were either been rushing attempts from a WR, scrambles from a QB, passing attempts, or sacks. 

    How does this year compare to those numbers?  So far in 2021 the Packers have run 673 offensive plays. Of these plays, 247 have been rushing attempts from a running back. Thus, designed RB runs have accounted for about 37% of the Packers' total plays. On a per-game basis, this works out to about 23 attempts per game in 2020, and 20.6 attempts per game in 2021, which is a margin of a only 2-3 attempts per game. Not a huge difference. Based on this data, it seems like Matt LaFleur and Aaron Rodgers are just as willing to run the ball in 2021 as they were in 2020.

    Why, then, are the Packers struggling on offense?

    This is an extremely detailed, complex question that I probably can't fully address here.  However, I think that we can still identify multiple factors that have limited the Packers. Before we do that though, it would be helpful to consider what a high-functioning, dynamic Matt LaFleur-run offense should look like. To illustrate what I believe the essence of LaFleur's scheme is, I would urge you to take a look at the following drive from the 3rd quarter of the Packers' 2021 game against the Bears in Soldier Field.

  

    What do we see here? Under-center plays from condensed formations. A focus on 11 personnel, with a good mix of heavy sets (12p/21p). Passes out quickly and in-rhythm. Pre- and post-snap motion. Different plays from the same formations. RPOs. Occasional opportunities for Rodgers to spread out the defense and work his magic. A minimization of negative plays. Although not perfect, this drive seems to be a great example of the ideal LaFleur offense. In my opinion, the run vs. pass splits don't matter all that much (by my count, they had 6 passes and 5 runs on this drive, if you're curious); rather, it's about tying together the run and pass in a way that puts the defense at a disadvantage.

    Now that we've established a working picture of what the LaFleur offense should look like, let's take a look at some of the reasons I believe that the Packers offense has struggled to replicate its 2020 production.

    Reason #1: The Offensive Line

    

    The injury issues that the Packers have suffered have been well-documented. One area that has been particularly hard-hit is their offensive line. All-Pro left tackle David Bakhtiari has been out most of the year. Rookie Josh Myers, who had solidified a role as the starting center, has been out on Injured Reserve since Week 6. Outstanding left guard Elgton Jenkins, who had been filling in as the LT, missed Weeks 3-5 and in Week 11 tore his ACL and was forced onto Injured Reserve for the remainder of the season. The Packers OL, so good in 2020, has struggled in 2021. This is largely due to the injuries they've dealt with as well as the understandable drop-off from center Corey Linsley - who the Packers let walk in free agency - to Josh Myers.

    This situation has hindered the Packers in numerous ways. In the passing game, the offense has already allowed 22 sacks compared to a total of 21 in 2020. Negative plays like these can disrupt the rhythm of an system like Matt LaFleur's. Especially if they occur on first or second down, they can force the Packers into more pass-oriented situations. This can take away from the "illusion of complexity" that they want to foster, where the defense is kept guessing whether a play will be a run or a pass. Defenses are going to respect the run less on 2nd and 20 than they would on 2nd and 5.

    In my opinion, offensive line issues have also impacted the effectiveness of the running game. Using the advanced stats at Pro Football Reference, we can see that in 2020 Packers RBs gained about 2.47 yards before contact per attempt, while in 2021 this number has dropped to 2.16 yards before contact. Film tends to back this up as well. Here we can see one of those runs from under center that have been a staple of LaFleur's offense. This time, though, right guard Royce Newman - forced into a starting role by the OL shuffle that injuries have prompted - gets blown into the backfield and the run is stopped only a few yards (though a shoe is then thrown by a Seattle defender, drawing a penalty). 

    In this next play, we see another staple concept of the LaFleur offense: a run-pass option (RPO) play. In calls like these, the QB has a choice on how the offense operates. If the defense plays the pass, then he will hand it off to the RB. If the defense commits to the run, then the QB will throw the passing concept - usually a screen or a short, quick route. In this play, the box count is favorable - Seattle has 5 defenders to the Packers' 5 OL. If the play is executed well, Green Bay should be able to get everyone blocked. Unfortunately, Lucas Patrick, replacing the injured Josh Myers at center, is overwhelmed by the Seahawks nose tackle. 

    Reason #2: Other Injuries/Personnel Deficiencies

    Green Bay's offensive personnel has also had issues in areas besides the offensive line. Tight end Robert Tonyan suffered a season-ending injury in Week 8 - and even before that, he hadn't been playing up to the level that he did in 2020. He was one of the Packer's most effective options last year when they chose to run boot-action plays, which are an important part of the LaFleur passing offense. His absence - and the release of former 3rd round pick Jace Sternberger at the beginning of the year - has deprived the offense of two of their better pass-receiving options at tight end. As good as Mercedes Lewis is, he doesn't have the same explosiveness that those two provided. Dominique Dafney and Josiah Deguara aren't traditional tight ends. Moreover, Deguara has struggled to build chemistry with Rodgers and Dafney has missed significant time during the season. In an offense that is built around presenting the same formations for both run and pass calls, good receiving tight ends are quite important.

    The absence of wide receiver Marquez Valdes-Scantling has no doubt had an impact as well. Forced out of the lineup by injury for Weeks 4-8, MVS has only recently begun to regain the same deep-ball role that he had in 2020. The absence of a true deep threat for much of the season has hurt the ability of the Packers offense to stress the defense down the field.

    Finally, Aaron Rodgers has had his own issues. Although he has played at a good to very good level for parts of the season, he has seemed to struggle at times with throwing in rhythm, being accurate downfield, and reading through passing concepts. These issues are likely connected to the injuries and protection issues that the Packers have had to deal with, but they have still hurt the offense's ability to stay on-schedule during drives.

    Reason #3: Certain Offensive Concepts Aren't as Effective

    As mentioned before, I think that the loss of depth at TE and OL have impacted the effectiveness of the running game and its connected pass concepts. To add on to these problems, defenses have started attacking GB in different ways compared to 2020. The main area that this sticks out is in the aforementioned boot-action game. Edge players to the side of the rollout have begun to attack the quarterback more aggressively, hurrying their decision-making process and often forcing incomplete passes or sacks. For an outstanding, extensive look at this trend, I would highly recommend this article by Oliver Connolly. 

    This next clip from the Seattle game is a great example of the problems that this defensive strategy has caused. The Seahawks send Jamal Adams on a blitz off of the edge, forcing an incomplete pass. It should be noted that the situation is compounded by an offensive miscue from Josiah Deguara. It appears as if he is supposed to block the edge defender and then release into a flat route, but fails to release when the edge player slants inside (more evidence of the issues that injuries have caused, since in most situations Tonyan would likely be in this role). Ultimately, though, this may not have mattered because of how fast Adams is crashing down. 

    Reason #4: Single-High Defenses    

    

    As I mentioned before, the Packers seem willing to run the ball in 2021 at a comparable rate to what they did in 2020. At first glance, however, they also appear hesitant to commit to running the ball early in games. I've heard this complaint levied from some Packers fans multiple times during this season, with many casting the blame on Matt LaFleur's play calls. To verify if and why this was occuring, I decided to rewatch several Packers games from this season. 

    The first game that I reviewed was the Packers' matchup earlier this year at Chicago. One thing immediately stuck out. Through the first four drives from the Packers offense, the Bears stayed in in single-high safety looks on all but 4 snaps (these occured on a 3rd & 10, an empty formation on 2nd & 7, on 2nd & goal at the 15, and on a 3rd & goal from the 25). In the the second game I watched, against the Washington Football Team, the opposing defense played 9 snaps in the first 4 drives that weren't single-high looks. Just like in the Bears game, most of the two-high looks used came in obvious passing situations.

    Next, I wanted to go back and see what trends were apparent earlier in the year, so I rewatched the game against the 49ers. There were some interesting differences. In their first 4 drives, the 49ers defense played 10 snaps where they were not in single-high. However, unlike the games against the WFT and the Bears, most of these snaps came in neutral situations. Only three were on clear passing downs (these were 3rd & 33, 3rd & 6, and 3rd & 4). This went beyond the early part of the games, though. I watched all 3 games the rest of the way through, and the patterns I identified appeared to persist.

    Although this is a limited sample size, I think some inferences can be drawn. First, I think that opposing defenses have been using more single-high defensive calls, loading up the box to stop the run. It's telling that the Bears defense, normally based out of a two-high structure, played so few snaps with two deep safeties through their first four drives.

     Second, I think that MVS's absence has impacted the team more than many realize. The 49ers were clearly wary of his deep speed, playing a lot of two-high safety looks on neutral downs. This tendency was present throughout all of the 49ers game, but was almost never the case in the Bears and WFT games I watched - which were two of the games that MVS missed. 

    Third, I think this offers another clue as to why the Packers aren't running the ball as much as some Packers fans would wish. The heavy boxes that the Chicago and Washington defenses employed presented an unfavorable situation to run the ball, likely affecting LaFleur's playcalling decisions. While not all the defenses the Packers have faced have adopted the same approach, many have turned to the same strategy of using heavy boxes and single-high defenses when facing the Packers. This is quite interesting, considering that in the past it is defenses that rely on two-high coverages that have usually given Rodgers and the Packers trouble.

    I keep returning to the Bears game. They're so familiar with Aaron Rodgers and what he can do, but they clearly did not think that the Packers could consistently threaten them deep without MVS. They were so confident in this that they played single-high coverage, often without any disguise, for the majority of the game. And they were, at least partially, right. Whether through pressure, downfield inaccuracy, or other factors, the Packers' downfield passing game was inconsistent. They were able to get enough chunk plays to win, but only ended up scoring 24 points. This clip is a great example of how the Bears pass-rush was able to disrupt deep plays at times.

    Another deep shot affected by pressure here - though I think that Rodgers could've used better footwork to improve his accuracy.

    This catch from the middle of the 4th quarter was one of the only two passing plays to go for more than 15 yards in the Bears game. The other was a catch-and-run across the middle of the field in the early 2nd quarter (also to Davante Adams).

    I think that the Packers' tendency to throw the ball more than people would like is partly due to this trend. LaFleur is going to call more passing plays if he sees defenses loading up the box. Moreover, we should remember how much control Rodgers is given in making pre-snap adjustments. If Rodgers sees a heavy box count, then he will try to attack the secondary, even if it means audibling out of a run call. I'm not trying to blame Rodgers for the offense's struggles; throwing the ball deep is often a good strategy against defenses that are prioritizing the run game. However, given the absence of MVS, the protection issues of the OL, and Rodgers' somewhat inconsistent performance, the Packers have not been able to hit enough of these deep plays to force defenses out of single-high coverages and into more favorable run looks. 

    To sum up, the Packers are not able to effectively run the ball because many defenses are using heavy boxes against them, but they are also unable to consistently threaten these single-high coverages with a deep passing game.

    Conclusion

    

    So, should the Packers run the ball more? The answer is . . . complicated. Fixing the offense is not a one-step process. There are a variety of issues that have influenced the Packers away from the run. Many have also hindered the passing game, including injuries to offensive personnel, subpar offensive line play, defensive tendencies, and more. I think that the Packers' recent offensive success against the Vikings is a good sign that some of these potential hinderances are trending in a better direction. I don't think that it is a coincidence that the Vikings game - which may have been the best offensive game that the Packers have had so far in 2021 - coincided with Valdes-Scantling's best game of the year. His presence will be key in opening up the box for Dillon and Jones. The potential return of David Bakhtiari - and hopefully Josh Myers - will give a boost to the pass-protection and overall OL performance.

    I think that the run game has certain inherent benefits. It takes pressure off of the quarterback and can help tire out and slow down the defensive lineman and pass-rushers of the defense. Even if the running game isn't working at a high level, a willingness to run the ball can still help open up play-action opportunities. As I mentioned earlier, LaFleur's offense is built off of a marriage of run and pass calls. Having the threat of the run present helps keep the defense guessing.

    I think that the reasons that the Packers have not run the ball more up to this point are quite defensible. As good as Aaron Jones and AJ Dillon are, running into a loaded box is usually not a recipe for consistent success - especially when most of your offensive lineman are struggling. However, the recent return of MVS should help force defenses into lighter boxes with more frequency. Given this, and the fact that Aaron Rodgers is dealing with a painful toe injury, I think that emphasizing the run game would be a great idea going forward. Ultimately, though, the execution of said run game will depend on the decisions of Aaron Rodgers. Matt LaFleur has made the choice to give him significant control of what the offense does. Will Rodgers be willing to run the ball more? If the boxes get lighter, then that should help move him in that direction. It will be fascinating - though possibly a bit frustrating at times -  to see how the offense operates going forward.