ImageImage

Dallas Lead Up

Moderators: MickeyDavis, paulpressey25, humanrefutation

User avatar
FAH1223
RealGM
Posts: 15,875
And1: 6,970
Joined: Nov 01, 2005
Location: Laurel, MD
       

Re: Dallas Lead Up 

Post#101 » by FAH1223 » Sun Oct 16, 2016 12:25 am

jakecronus8 wrote:Rodgers is gonna get about 45 passing attempts and I don't feel good about that. Feels weird to say.


McGinn WENT IN on Rodgers. We've been saying this since the bye week last year.

McGinn: Rodgers falls from ranks of greats
Bob McGinn , Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
5:45 p.m. CDT October 15, 2016


His passing yards (3,677) and touchdowns (29) in the last 16 games were the lowest of the eight segments, and his interception total of 10 was his highest since the first two segments of his career.

It’s almost as if an imposter has been wearing the No. 12 jersey since that night in Denver.

At the risk of statistical overload, allow me one more set of metrics to underscore the depths of Rodgers’ struggles as the face of this offense and this franchise.

Situational football dominates analysis of the game. Whether it’s third down, red zone, short-yardage or goal-line, it’s all important.

To say any of those situations are more vital than first down would be a stretch. First down plays a direct role in the last three, and without steady production on first down, third downs become far less manageable.

Usually on first down, everything is on the table. It measures a passing game, a running game and, without question, a quarterback. First down sets everything else up.

Through five weeks of the season the Packers ranked last in the NFL in average gain on first down at 3.79 yards. Atlanta leads at 8.63.

The statistics available to me date to 2003. In the last 13 seasons, the worst first-down average was 3.88 by the 2-14 Houston Texans of coach Dom Capers in 2005.

The average record of the teams that finished last on first down since 2003 was 4-12. Ten of the 13 teams either ranked 31st or 32nd in total offense.

Of the starting quarterbacks for those 13 teams, the highest passer rating was the 86.2 compiled by San Francisco’s Blaine Gabbert last year. Five starters, including John Skelton, Jimmy Clausen, Brady Quinn, Andrew Walter and Joey Harrington, had ratings below 68.

It’s just a four-game aberration for the Packers, right? Not quite. They ranked 31st a year ago at 4.53.

New England, the one NFL team with offensive-system continuity to rival Green Bay’s, ranked in the top half of the league every year except 2008, when Tom Brady went down in the opener and Matt Cassel took over.

With Brady, the Patriots never have averaged worse than 5.30 on first down since 2003.

McCarthy, Rodgers, assistant coaches and other players have been brushing aside the offensive malaise for the better part of 12 months. McCarthy fired some more coaches after last season, established fundamentals as his major emphasis for 2016 and continued to praise on Rodgers at every turn.

Other than the fact the Packers are 3-1, there is little evidence at this point to think they’re a championship offense. The passing game has settled in again as one of the NFL’s least effective just as Rodgers checks in 19th in passer rating (87.7), 28th in average gain per pass (6.30) and 31st in completion percentage (56.1).

Rod Marinelli, now the Cowboys’ defensive coordinator, was preparing for the NFC championship game in January 2011 as coordinator for the Bears. Rodgers was coming off one of the best games of his career in the 48-21 divisional romp against the Falcons at the Georgia Dome.

“I’ll tell you what, when he’s outside the pocket, he’s extremely accurate,” Marinelli said a few days before the game. “It’s uncanny. He steps up in the pocket well. The thing I admire, he’ll take the hit to get the ball down the field.”

Rodgers makes a magical throw or two every week, and almost always on the move. When he uses that incredible release to drive a ball downfield and dead on the money, it’s part of the reason why those who watch highlights still rate him as the best.

For years, it seemed like every time that Rodgers ran up through the pocket, at least from my vantage point, a big pass play followed. It was a shooting gallery. Defensive backs couldn’t plaster their receivers long enough.

“He was on the other hash and he threw it all the way back to the side,” Seattle cornerback Byron Maxwell said after Rodgers’ 15-yard completion across the field to Jordy Nelson during the NFC title game in January 2015. “I am like, ‘OK, man, what is this, a robot, really?”

Rodgers is extending plays more and more each year and, in the last 12 months, with less success. Rather than giving plays time to develop, too often he bolts prematurely. When he does extend, he isn’t as decisive. He’s not seeing the field as well. He’s missing more open targets.

As far as planting his back foot from shotgun or a straight dropback, striding into the throw and taking a hit, it almost never happens. Just as Brett Favre fell into poor throwing mechanics later on during the Mike Sherman years, Rodgers is following suit.

You see a lot of all-arm throws, skipping into throws, firing off balance and across his body. He sails one pass, bounces another. At times, his feet don’t work in unison with his torso. His deep-ball accuracy, once extraordinary, has improved somewhat from a year ago when it was embarrassingly bad for a player of his stature.

The abject failure on first down over the last 22 games is due in large part to Rodgers, who has a respectable ground game and a first-rate offensive line. The short-to-intermediate passing game on first down that sets the table for what’s to come has been missing.

Rodgers’ mediocrity a year ago was partially obscured by his wondrous Hail Mary passes of 61 yards to Richard Rodgers that beat Detroit and another of 41 to Jeff Janis that forced overtime in the Arizona divisional game.

It also should be remembered that in the first six games of 2015, a critical element in the offensive success was free plays. In Games 1-6, Rodgers completed passes for 52, 34, 29, 27 and 22 yards after his hard count coaxed the opponent offside, not to mention a 52-yard pass-interference penalty on Seattle’s Richard Sherman.

Since then, the Packers haven’t had a single “free play” completion. Defensive linemen have seen it, been warned about it and aren’t jumping as much.

Still, Rodgers continues to hard count time after time as the play clock winds down to 1 or 2. He also has an eagle eye out for substituting D-linemen, and twice this season he has drawn a penalty via quick counts.

The offense probably would be better off if his teammates could focus on the play and getting off the ball in advantageous fashion without all this other stuff going on so often.

McCarthy is at fault, too. He’s the one in January who promoted youthful Luke Getsy, a college quarterback and quality-control coach, to coach wide receivers, a key position for a passing game with major issues that once was the province of proven veteran assistants like Jimmy Robinson, Ray Sherman and Lew Carpenter.

One NFC personnel man has said several times that the Packers’ receivers don’t run routes in the classic sense of the word. The talent at wide receiver is more than adequate, according to several scouts, but McCarthy’s staple remains isolation routes instead of using bunches, rubs and other creative devices to give receivers easier releases into the secondary.

At the same time, let’s end this nonsense about receivers needing to gain the trust of Rodgers. What he needs to do is his job, throw accurately to the open man and let the coaches handle it from there.

My guess is that Rodgers, after 12 years as a pro, would be a hard man to coach.

Can you imagine another player saying “it’s a silly drill … I did it today as a favor to the coaches,” as did Rodgers when McCarthy employed the wet-ball drill last month in practice with rain in the forecast for the Detroit game?

Asked in August what he needed to accomplish in what became his only exhibition appearance, Rodgers replied, “Nothing.” Which was ridiculous, as his sluggish start illustrated.

Rodgers, who can be extremely sensitive, knows full well that no one in the building would dare criticize him publicly, and from McCarthy on down that’s the way it is. Seemingly every third fan in the seats owns his jersey, and there’s little question who’s the most popular member of the organization.

Meanwhile, eager-beaver young assistants across the league have had 10 going on 11 years to study the tendencies of McCarthy and Rodgers. They’re really not fooling anyone anymore. The book’s out there, and the advantage of having been together for more than a decade probably is countered by the realities of trying to stay fresh against well-schooled opponents.

Favre, it should be remembered, played his best football at age 40 when he was working for his fourth team and seventh head coach.

Also, can people please stop calling Rodgers a lock for the Pro Football Hall of Fame?

Rodgers is close to securing a bust in Canton, but to clinch a berth he must get out of this tailspin and reach at least another Super Bowl. His playoff resume since 2010 is spotty, to say the least. Rules changes make it less challenging physically to play quarterback, and the glossy passer ratings for Rodgers and others need to be weighed carefully by selectors in evaluating quarterbacks of this generation.

It’s become almost pointless even to discuss Rodgers with personnel men and coaches from non-playoff teams. Because he’s so much more talented than the quarterbacks many teams have, they can hardly fathom how a discouraging word can be uttered about him.

If those scouts had time to examine the way Rodgers has played for a year when compared to the bulk of his career, they would understand the situation.

My bottom line, after seeing the last 12 months, is to rank Rodgers fifth among NFL quarterbacks behind Brady, Russell Wilson, Ben Roethlisberger and Cam Newton. That is, if everyone were healthy, supporting casts were equal and there was one game to win.

Certainly, Rodgers can regain his preeminent rank. He’s in tremendous shape, neither age (32) nor injury has affected his movement and his arm remains excellent. He is driven partly by proving people wrong, and there’s little doubt the last 16 games should motivate him to no end.

By the same token, there’s perhaps a minute chance Rodgers could become the Packers’ first skill-position player with multiple Pro Bowls to fade away as fast as fullback John Brockington did in the mid-1970s if he isn’t able to alter the course of his career.

No situation is ever perfect for a quarterback. But no matter what you think of McCarthy, his staff, his tactics and his other 52 players, he has made it clear many times that helping the quarterback best perform his job is his top priority every year.

So save the excuses for Rodgers’ performance since Denver a year ago. It’s a quarterbacks game, and the all-time greats at the position have led their teams and excelled no matter the circumstances. That’s what Rodgers must get back to doing, starting now.
Image
jakecronus8
RealGM
Posts: 15,999
And1: 7,276
Joined: Feb 06, 2006
     

Re: Dallas Lead Up 

Post#102 » by jakecronus8 » Sun Oct 16, 2016 12:33 am

It is disturbing that Rodgers had been abysmal simply by opposing teams not jumping offsides. you can only use the receivers not being open excuse for so long.
Do it for Chuck
User avatar
FAH1223
RealGM
Posts: 15,875
And1: 6,970
Joined: Nov 01, 2005
Location: Laurel, MD
       

Re: Dallas Lead Up 

Post#103 » by FAH1223 » Sun Oct 16, 2016 3:56 am

We have 1 RB active tomorrow.

They plan on using Montgomery and Cobb as backup RBs. How idiotic is this? Considering one was injured for the year playing RB and the other got clobbered last Sunday night...

Rollins may not play. So we only have Gunter, Hawkins and Goodson with Hyde.
Image
HKPackFan
RealGM
Posts: 14,901
And1: 10,306
Joined: Jan 14, 2014
Location: Hong Kong
   

Re: Dallas Lead Up 

Post#104 » by HKPackFan » Sun Oct 16, 2016 5:02 am

FAH1223 wrote:We have 1 RB active tomorrow.

They plan on using Montgomery and Cobb as backup RBs. How idiotic is this? Considering one was injured for the year playing RB and the other got clobbered last Sunday night...

Rollins may not play. So we only have Gunter, Hawkins and Goodson with Hyde.


Randall still out?
#FreeChuckDiesel
RRyder823
General Manager
Posts: 8,134
And1: 4,169
Joined: May 06, 2014
   

Re: RE: Re: Dallas Lead Up 

Post#105 » by RRyder823 » Sun Oct 16, 2016 5:59 am

HKPackFan wrote:
FAH1223 wrote:We have 1 RB active tomorrow.

They plan on using Montgomery and Cobb as backup RBs. How idiotic is this? Considering one was injured for the year playing RB and the other got clobbered last Sunday night...

Rollins may not play. So we only have Gunter, Hawkins and Goodson with Hyde.


Randall still out?

Randell is listed as questionable. Not sure where the "Rollins might not play" came from. Last I saw he wasn't even on the injury report. Then again I haven't kept great tabs on it this week

It does appear that the plan will be to use Montgomery at RB. I don't really see the problem with it that most do. He's built pretty damn thick and when we drafted him I actually thought he projected better as a RB.

Even going into the season it was pretty obvious they planned on using him in that role, along with Cobb, when they only retained two RBs out of camp.


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using RealGM mobile app
WeekapaugGroove
RealGM
Posts: 23,868
And1: 19,673
Joined: Feb 07, 2010

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Dallas Lead Up 

Post#106 » by WeekapaugGroove » Sun Oct 16, 2016 4:59 pm

RRyder823 wrote:
HKPackFan wrote:
FAH1223 wrote:We have 1 RB active tomorrow.

They plan on using Montgomery and Cobb as backup RBs. How idiotic is this? Considering one was injured for the year playing RB and the other got clobbered last Sunday night...

Rollins may not play. So we only have Gunter, Hawkins and Goodson with Hyde.


Randall still out?

Randell is listed as questionable. Not sure where the "Rollins might not play" came from. Last I saw he wasn't even on the injury report. Then again I haven't kept great tabs on it this week

It does appear that the plan will be to use Montgomery at RB. I don't really see the problem with it that most do. He's built pretty damn thick and when we drafted him I actually thought he projected better as a RB.

Even going into the season it was pretty obvious they planned on using him in that role, along with Cobb, when they only retained two RBs out of camp.


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using RealGM mobile app

Yeah it kind of looks like they view Montgomery as more of a rb than wr at this point. Id like to see him get some normal formation carries and see what he can do.

Just saw starks had surgery on the knee. Hes been bad anyway so might be time to throw him on ir and move on.
Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside in a cloud of smoke, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming Wow! What a Ride!-H.S.T.
User avatar
trwi7
RealGM
Posts: 110,876
And1: 26,396
Joined: Jul 12, 2006
Location: Aussie bias
         

Re: Dallas Lead Up 

Post#107 » by trwi7 » Sun Oct 16, 2016 5:26 pm

Why not do the read option with Cobb as the QB and Montgomery in the backfield? Why not try the jet sweep with Davis to use his speed?

I mean, there are some scenarios where a WR in the backfield could work but McCarthy, like pretty much everything else he does on offense, is so unimaginative with it.
stellation wrote:What's the difference between Gery Woelful and this glass of mineral water? The mineral water actually has a source."


I Hate Manure wrote:We look to be awful next season without Beasley.
WiscoKing13
RealGM
Posts: 11,702
And1: 1,274
Joined: Jan 03, 2009
     

Re: Dallas Lead Up 

Post#108 » by WiscoKing13 » Sun Oct 16, 2016 5:53 pm

Glazeer saying Starks had surgery this morning and to miss multiple weeks. Makes even less sense now not to bring in another back.
DanoMac wrote:
bullox wrote:That phone number was an asset to you. You had a direct line to the gm. You've squandered it.


I squandered an asset? Then Hammond taught me well.
User avatar
Turk Nowitzki
RealGM
Posts: 32,642
And1: 9,929
Joined: Feb 26, 2010
Location: on the Hellmouth
     

Re: Dallas Lead Up 

Post#109 » by Turk Nowitzki » Sun Oct 16, 2016 7:05 pm

Randall is back and now Rollins is out. We just can't catch a break in the secondary.
User avatar
thomchatt3rton
Head Coach
Posts: 6,387
And1: 2,228
Joined: Jun 11, 2009
 

Re: Dallas Lead Up 

Post#110 » by thomchatt3rton » Sun Oct 16, 2016 7:27 pm

trwi7 wrote:Why not do the read option with Cobb as the QB and Montgomery in the backfield? Why not try the jet sweep with Davis to use his speed?

I mean, there are some scenarios where a WR in the backfield could work but McCarthy, like pretty much everything else he does on offense, is so unimaginative with it.


Agree. Do something-- anything-- besides just a straight hand-off.

Would you agree that they are straight handoffs? Or is it possible that it IS a read play, and Rodgers has just been reading it as "run" every time lately? I'm not 100% sure, but I think it's just a hand-off.
User avatar
trwi7
RealGM
Posts: 110,876
And1: 26,396
Joined: Jul 12, 2006
Location: Aussie bias
         

Re: Dallas Lead Up 

Post#111 » by trwi7 » Sun Oct 16, 2016 7:45 pm

thomchatt3rton wrote:
trwi7 wrote:Why not do the read option with Cobb as the QB and Montgomery in the backfield? Why not try the jet sweep with Davis to use his speed?

I mean, there are some scenarios where a WR in the backfield could work but McCarthy, like pretty much everything else he does on offense, is so unimaginative with it.


Agree. Do something-- anything-- besides just a straight hand-off.

Would you agree that they are straight handoffs? Or is it possible that it IS a read play, and Rodgers has just been reading it as "run" every time lately? I'm not 100% sure, but I think it's just a hand-off.


No, I think they're straight hand offs. Every time we have Cobb or Montgomery in the backfield it's always either a straight dive or that stupid pitch directly behind Rodgers.
stellation wrote:What's the difference between Gery Woelful and this glass of mineral water? The mineral water actually has a source."


I Hate Manure wrote:We look to be awful next season without Beasley.
User avatar
ReasonablySober
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 98,653
And1: 35,059
Joined: Dec 02, 2001
Location: Cheap dinner. Watch basketball. Bone down.
Contact:

Re: Dallas Lead Up 

Post#112 » by ReasonablySober » Sun Oct 16, 2016 7:47 pm

I'd forgotten we're playing on Thursday. Thank **** we've only got the Bears at home.
User avatar
Turk Nowitzki
RealGM
Posts: 32,642
And1: 9,929
Joined: Feb 26, 2010
Location: on the Hellmouth
     

Re: Dallas Lead Up 

Post#113 » by Turk Nowitzki » Sun Oct 16, 2016 7:59 pm

trwi7 wrote:
thomchatt3rton wrote:
trwi7 wrote:Why not do the read option with Cobb as the QB and Montgomery in the backfield? Why not try the jet sweep with Davis to use his speed?

I mean, there are some scenarios where a WR in the backfield could work but McCarthy, like pretty much everything else he does on offense, is so unimaginative with it.


Agree. Do something-- anything-- besides just a straight hand-off.

Would you agree that they are straight handoffs? Or is it possible that it IS a read play, and Rodgers has just been reading it as "run" every time lately? I'm not 100% sure, but I think it's just a hand-off.


No, I think they're straight hand offs. Every time we have Cobb or Montgomery in the backfield it's always either a straight dive or that stupid pitch directly behind Rodgers.

It's like he thinks that just because it's a WR in the backfield instead of a RB it's going to confuse the defense even if they run the same plays they always do. Oh, to be in the brain of McCarthy.
User avatar
thomchatt3rton
Head Coach
Posts: 6,387
And1: 2,228
Joined: Jun 11, 2009
 

Re: Dallas Lead Up 

Post#114 » by thomchatt3rton » Sun Oct 16, 2016 8:20 pm

trwi7 wrote:
thomchatt3rton wrote:
trwi7 wrote:Why not do the read option with Cobb as the QB and Montgomery in the backfield? Why not try the jet sweep with Davis to use his speed?

I mean, there are some scenarios where a WR in the backfield could work but McCarthy, like pretty much everything else he does on offense, is so unimaginative with it.


Agree. Do something-- anything-- besides just a straight hand-off.

Would you agree that they are straight handoffs? Or is it possible that it IS a read play, and Rodgers has just been reading it as "run" every time lately? I'm not 100% sure, but I think it's just a hand-off.


No, I think they're straight hand offs. Every time we have Cobb or Montgomery in the backfield it's always either a straight dive or that stupid pitch directly behind Rodgers.


That's what they look like to me too.

But there was a time when Cobb would line up back there and then run a route. Haven't seen that in what? A year or more? There was also some sets with both Cobb and TY in the backfield last year too where we did different things with it (I think the KC game)- so evidence exists that MM knows it can be used better than it is.
But that's what made me wonder if it isn't some package play with a read option, and it's just coincidence that the last 8 times (or however many) we've seen it, it's been a run.

It's hard to imagine MM thinking that a straight handoff to Cobb is a good play on it's own. Maybe he uses it to "try to get Cobb going" or some such rationale.

I'll have to watch for it next time and see if I can spot any indication that it might be a package play.

Return to Green Bay Packers