Rodgers Gambling Problem

[pbmax]

I think its also worth noting that none of these 354 attempted passes occurred in 2010 and nearly none in 2011 as the packers famously never trailed by more than a TD for a huge stretch spanning multiple seasons aka the best two years of his career and the two healthiest ever since.

That begs the question though, and the author makes note of it. The Packers are a hugely successful front running offense. They are much less successful when behind (esp. behind late).

I think this has as much to do with McCarthy as Rodgers. McCarthy purposefully does not vary his game plan mid game so he can avoid making emotional decisions based on one off occurrences or swings of emotion. But this works less well when you have a game where the offense isn't automatic and a small number of drives left to score.

[Rutnstrut]

IMO, Rodgers plays it TOO safe at times. This is where I have heard people accuse him of being a stat whore. I don't think it's so much that he doesn't gamble, I think we were just so used to Bret gambling a little to much. I will say that is one of the things I liked about Favre, he wasn't scared to "swing for the fences". I have also said before that Rodgers is just not a come from behind type player imo. He doesn't seem to thrive on that kind of pressure.

[3irty1]

That begs the question though, and the author makes note of it. The Packers are a hugely successful front running offense. They are much less successful when behind (esp. behind late).

I think this has as much to do with McCarthy as Rodgers. McCarthy purposefully does not vary his game plan mid game so he can avoid making emotional decisions based on one off occurrences or swings of emotion. But this works less well when you have a game where the offense isn't automatic and a small number of drives left to score.

I don't know about that, McCarthy's balls are so big they have lesser testicles orbiting around them. Think of the ballsy onside kicks, the ballsy deep shots on 3rd/4th and 1. He has no aversion to high variance strategies but definitely favors calculated risks over straight gambling.

[pbmax]

I don't know about that, McCarthy's balls are so big they have lesser testicles orbiting around them. Think of the ballsy onside kicks, the ballsy deep shots on 3rd/4th and 1. He has no aversion to high variance strategies but definitely favors calculated risks over straight gambling.

Not too conservative, but the lesson he learned about no panicking over your game plan in the middle of the game has been learned a little too well.

[3irty1]

Not too conservative, but the lesson he learned about no panicking over your game plan in the middle of the game has been learned a little too well.

Offense isn't like defense where you make drastic adjustments. By nature the offense is imposing their will on the defense, the defense is the side that doesn't know what's coming. On offense your preparation, your game plan is all you've got. Abandoning it would mean going to plan B but if you have a plan B that must have been part of your game plan anyways.

I still think the difference is just Arod but the stats are cherry picked and bogus. The down by 9+ and the 4th quarter comeback stast have little in common other than Rodgers is an outlier in both. I'm not convinced it has anything to do with averting risk to a fault.

[pbmax]

Offense isn't like defense where you make drastic adjustments. By nature the offense is imposing their will on the defense, the defense is the side that doesn't know what's coming. On offense your preparation, your game plan is all you've got. Abandoning it would mean going to plan B but if you have a plan B that must have been part of your game plan anyways.

I still think the difference is just Arod but the stats are cherry picked and bogus. The down by 9+ and the 4th quarter comeback stast have little in common other than Rodgers is an outlier in both. I'm not convinced it has anything to do with averting risk to a fault.

Its a fair point about D countering the O. However, one of the reasons (and we might be up to ten at this point) for the famous 15 scripted plays was to suss out how the D was going to react to the things the 49ers wanted to do.

The offense must then adjust too. And if your still in the hole, its the plays the QB always feels he can make, some teammate input and pulling a surpass off the back page of the call sheet.

I do think one structural issue is resolved with Lacy and Starks and Harris on board. There will be less empty backfield and that will make both running and passing easier depending on how the D adjusts.

[sharpe1027]

Holding the ball longer is a risk just as throwing the ball into coverage is a risk. Without data on which risk has a better return, what is the point?

[Guiness]

Holding the ball longer is a risk just as throwing the ball into coverage is a risk. Without data on which risk has a better return, what is the point?

Wow, that is exactly what I was thinking but couldn't put it in words. Tou did it in your first sentence! +2!

[pbmax]

Holding the ball longer is a risk just as throwing the ball into coverage is a risk. Without data on which risk has a better return, what is the point?

You can just stop being sensible and ruining a good argument.

[pbmax]

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/...odgers-enigma/

Well, some better data here in this attempt. More specific anyway. This is the same guy who pointed out that too few INTs might point out that Rodgers takes too few chances when down late.

Here he has some data on Rodger's 4th quarter success getting TDs. The point differential should week out when M3 is playing for a 53 yard Mason Crosby FG.




Then the counter-factual. Rodgers interceptions grouped by size of score gap. He says he is prepared to eat crow, but ...



As others pointed out, we are still only looking at one kind of risk (INTs) and not running with the ball, rolling out or holding it to find an open receiver. However, the big fourth quarter discrepancy here might point out another unique situation where more risk is warranted. This analysis also is limited to a comparison only with Peyton.

[King Friday]

Statistical charts are worthless half the time.

The second chart above is for all 2ND HALF drives. That skews things greatly. Being down by 10 points in the first 10 minutes of the 3rd quarter is a hell of a lot different than the last 10 minutes of the 4th quarter...but this charts lumps both together? Meaningless unless you do a far greater dive into the numbers to establish WHEN these QBs were behind by 9+ points.

[denverYooper]

I see a frontrunner.

[pbmax]

Statistical charts are always worthless half the time.

Yogi fixed it for you.

[pbmax]

Here is a good response to the last 538 article: http://www.acmepackingcompany.com/20...utch-comebacks

1. Morris used four games in his sample in which Aaron Rodgers did not start.

2. Morris did not include any playoff games.

3. Several game mentioned where Rodgers mounted a huge comeback but was undone specifically by ST and Defense late, as well as the really weird FG strategy in the Delhomme Panthers game when Steve Smith decided to remind everyone he was very good and the Packer special teams rewarded McCarthy's confidence in them by surrendering back to back long KO returns. Also, bonus desperation INT.

4. The huge amount of games (15 of 21) that occurred early in his career.