Panthers Postgame - Worst 6-2 Packers team ever?

[Xanadu]

I think Cobb needs to be traded for Lillard.

+1 infinity.

[HKPackFan]

Leroy Butler did a nice Xs and Os piece on the 3rd and 16 play. He wasn't a fan of the playcall, but he said it was designed fine. The CULPRIT of that play??? #42 Morgan Burnett began to run up when he saw Cam scramble to the right. Morgan Burnett wasn't covering anyone was in space, just had to stay in that space. Had no responsibilities on the play, just cover that space where Jeremy slowly ran into. Morgan left that spot and ran forward to stop Cam from scrambling on 3rd and 16 when there were at least 3 defenders between Cam and the 1st down marker. WHY ARE YOU RUNNING when Cam is STILL 20+ yards away from a 1st down?? If Morgan doesn't move it could have been a pick, Cam threw it right to where Morgan was supposed to be covering.

What's that got to tell you when your most veteran player in the entire secondary is the one fíng up the coverage? We blame it on youth and rookies or sh***y players we don't like (I'm often picking on Palmer or Hyde), but what about when guys like Burnett are doing stupid ****?

I'm no fan of Capers AT ALL, but who's to blame? Are his players idiots? Or is he not able to teach them where to be and how to run coverages? Is Capers the idiot? Or does he have crappy players that their talent is overestimated?

[ak7]

I'm no fan of Capers AT ALL, but who's to blame? Are his players idiots? Or is he not able to teach them where to be and how to run coverages? Is Capers the idiot? Or does he have crappy players that their talent is overestimated?

Both.

Capers is too conservative when he needs to be aggressive. 3rd and 16 and you rush 4 and play zone against a mobile QB who can extend plays with his legs? That's literally about the only way a team like the Panthers is going to convert a 3rd and 16, so why would you call a play that enhances those chances? Dumb.

Burnett broke his responsibility and is rightfully wrong, but you can't win if you don't put your players in a position to succeed. That playcall was not a position to succeed from. Too passive. Capers is always doing this type of crap and it ALWAYS backfires at crucial points of the game.

[th87]

The Farrar article was a confirmation of some nagging suspicions I'd had, where Rodgers has to be perfect or close for us to win most games. The long-developing plays where Rodgers has to drop dimes. I've seen garbage teams like the Redskins scheme their WRs open, and I know their receiving corps isn't better than ours. I just wonder why we're not using all of our ammo. Are we saving it for the playoffs? A few years ago, MM was considered extremely creative and rotated in different personnel groups on virtually every play. I wonder what happened.

[El Duderino]

I'm no fan of Capers AT ALL, but who's to blame? Are his players idiots? Or is he not able to teach them where to be and how to run coverages? Is Capers the idiot? Or does he have crappy players that their talent is overestimated?

Both.

Capers is too conservative when he needs to be aggressive. 3rd and 16 and you rush 4 and play zone against a mobile QB who can extend plays with his legs? That's literally about the only way a team like the Panthers is going to convert a 3rd and 16, so why would you call a play that enhances those chances? Dumb.

Burnett broke his responsibility and is rightfully wrong, but you can't win if you don't put your players in a position to succeed. That playcall was not a position to succeed from. Too passive. Capers is always doing this type of crap and it ALWAYS backfires at crucial points of the game.

I agree it's both.

As for just rushing three on 3rd and long, most fans do hate it and i'm not big fan either, but i remember an article McGinn wrote roughly two years ago about the defense which made me think more rationally. He had gotten tons of emails from angry fans over a blown 3rd and long after Capers just rushed three. So McGinn went back and looked at the percentage of times the defense under Capers got off the field on say 3rd and 10 or more i believe when rushing 3, 4, 5, or 6 guys.

Well, the stats showed that the best percentage was rushing just three, but i forget the exact numbers for each one, just that rushing three was best. What McGinn then said next is something that ran true to me.

He said that most fans hate rushing three so much that when it backfires, it drives them so crazy that it sticks with them and in turn makes them yell see that's why you shouldn't rush three, but had Capers rushed 4 or blitzed instead, those same fans wouldn't be irate because they view rushing more guys as aggressive, regardless had the offense got the first down. That fans don't consider all of the times rushing three worked compared to few times it failed.

This resonated with me as i read the article because i'd scream at the TV pretty much every time rushing three would fail, all the way back to the 90's Packers under Fritz Shurmur who many fans gave the nickname Fritz "no blitz" Shurmur, even though he ran good to great defenses. All the countless times it worked never stuck with me anywhere near the way i'd be irate of the few times it failed.

So given how absolutely pathetic our pass rush was vs Carolina regardless if Capers rushed four or blitzed, i can understand why he chose to just rush three and add another guy in coverage. My bigger beef with Capers is that for to long, mental breakdowns in the secondary leading to big plays happens just to often with guys looking confused at each other.

[HKPackFan]

The Farrar article was a confirmation of some nagging suspicions I'd had, where Rodgers has to be perfect or close for us to win most games. The long-developing plays where Rodgers has to drop dimes. I've seen garbage teams like the Redskins scheme their WRs open, and I know their receiving corps isn't better than ours. I just wonder why we're not using all of our ammo. Are we saving it for the playoffs? A few years ago, MM was considered extremely creative and rotated in different personnel groups on virtually every play. I wonder what happened.

My guess is they are so busy trying their hurry up offense and avoid substitutions and get gimmicky tricks like 12 men on the field they sacrifice using more talent on offense and mixing it up more. So it becomes more monotonous routes and players.

[thomchatt3rton]

The Farrar article was a confirmation of some nagging suspicions I'd had, where Rodgers has to be perfect or close for us to win most games. The long-developing plays where Rodgers has to drop dimes. I've seen garbage teams like the Redskins scheme their WRs open, and I know their receiving corps isn't better than ours. I just wonder why we're not using all of our ammo. Are we saving it for the playoffs? A few years ago, MM was considered extremely creative and rotated in different personnel groups on virtually every play. I wonder what happened.

My guess is they are so busy trying their hurry up offense and avoid substitutions and get gimmicky tricks like 12 men on the field they sacrifice using more talent on offense and mixing it up more. So it becomes more monotonous routes and players.

So start with a somewhat empty cupboard in terms of an already-depleted and really young WR/TE corp.

Add some in-season injuries to that corps (Quarless leaves us with ONE tight-end, both Ty and Adams are in and out of the lineup) and combine that with a coaching staff that has always seemed overly cautious, risk-adverse, reluctant to change and slow to adapt.

Add to that a QB who's good enough to get you a win most weeks even with a vanilla offense and a depleted WR corps, thus giving the coaching staff the luxury to continue to be overly-cautious and slow to change, adapt or take risks.

My hope is that when we get healthier at WR, get Quarless back, we'll start to show more variation on offense. It could be that part of the problem is we just lack the personnel.

But I also fear that:
-Decline in variation of offensive plays coincides with giving Rodgers more play-calling power at the line of scrimmage. Obviously Rodgers doesn't determine the personnel that rotate in and out, but if Rodgers is given play-calling responsibility at the line, it makes sense that MM would give him the type of personnel sets that Rodgers generally prefers to work with. This kind of makes sense- look at the success we have with our first 15 scripted plays, our hurry-up sets etc- anything that seems more coach-scripted, and less determined by Rodgers sitting at the line, reading the D. Idk.
-It has something to do with Rodgers constantly scrambling out of the pocket, having to turn his back on receivers as he runs for his life, or just buys time- it's hard to imagine a bunch of traditional, WCO slant-type stuff working with a QB who can't/won't sit in the pocket, right?
-Our WR corps has been deteriorating steadily since its peak in 2010 and 2011-ish, Rodgers has been camouflaging this for years, but its really catching up with us now (undeniably true to a certain extent).