McCarthy's Offense: McAdoo Edition

[mraynrand]

Agreed, which indicates that some mythical middle of the field attack change not only didn't impact the turnaround, but didn't exist in the first place.

yep. Good stuff Vince.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Green Bay's offense is ranked 8th in points and 16th in yards having played against the 3rd (Cin.), 9th (Chi), 13th (Atl) and 14th (Sea) ranked defenses so far.

Falcons and Bengals in particular have gotten after QB's (each rank 3rd with 12) which is usually GB's offensive achilles heal. That's proven out so far this year as well. Rodgers was sacked 13 times in their 3 worst point producing games and only twice when they racked up 35 on the Bears.

With Guards playing Tackle and UDFA rookies starting on the o-line, I'd say the offense has done pretty well getting in the end zone and should only get better.

They've been particularly good in the most important situations that drive point production - #1 in the league in Red Zone TD % and #3 in 3rd Down Conversion Rate. They'll win a lot of games if they keep up that situational production - and the defense continues to hold up.

Individually, I tend to agree with you about Adams from a contract standpoint. He's a good possession guy who can get off the line and fight for balls but a complimentary guy who is fortunate to fit the Packers' and Rodgers' game pretty well. If someone wants to pay up for him like the Vikes did for Jennings, he could easily fall of the cliff harder and faster than Jennings did post-GB.

Rodgers and the Packers scheme spreads the ball around so much by knowing defensive tendencies, matchups and attacking what the defense gives them rather than targeting any of their guys like most teams do with their 1's, so it can be tough to judge individual production. That said, Football Outsiders has Nelson as the #2 ranked receiver in the league right now. Cobb is #22 and Adams is #24. A couple teams (Rams and Vikes) have their top 2 guys higher than GB's top 2, but no one matches GB's top 3.

No fair, Vince! Making points by relying on facts is no fair to us seat-of-the-pantsers!!

[mraynrand]

Rodgers does like to often wait and see if he can make the bigger play and passes on throwing to the open player underneath. I also think Bennett's numbers will improve once our starting tackles are back and he doesn't have to block as much.

I agree. The problems with the O line explain a lot. Much like Rodgers gets comfortable with his top receiver (Jennings, Nelson), knowing each other's nuances, the same could be said for Rodgers and Bacteria - Rodgers moves in the pocket in a particular way, and Bac often can play cat and mouse with the pass rusher, just keeping him at bay while Rodgers moves around back there. The fill-in guys have either been incompetent (Murphy, Spriggs) or more conventional (Taybor™), but none have been as athletic as Bac and allowed for those 'extended pockets' that are such a feature of the Rodgers-led offense. The way that Rodgers-Bakhtiari relationship works is really an art form.

[pbmax]

vince,

Can you post the personnel numbers for 2015? The 2016 numbers featured an offense without its best TE, so McCarthy was using other formations. Injuries certainly played a role in the drought, it was not just game plans and personnel groups.

During run the table, Cook was back and getting increasingly healthy. He was operating in the middle of the field, against the middle of the defense. Even if he is running a crossing route (like his catch versus the Cowboys in the playoffs) that is threatening the middle of the D, even if the play was extended and the throw was from outside the hash to outside the hash. He was bracketed by a LB and a safety (or nickel CB) I believe.

As I recall, prior to Giants and McAdoo, it was the Packers leading the lead in 11 personnel.

[pbmax]

He may be using more stacks and bunches but I found no empirical evidence to support that.

I would bet a significant sum on that this year. He went to it a bit last year during run the table, but its been a regular feature this year. He's put as many as four skill position players in a bunch. He runs from this as well.

[pbmax]

those directional numbers don't look all that different to me, but there are no confidence intervals so what can I say

I think those are a combo of Rodgers preference and M3 play calling, which over time has been influenced by Rodgers preference.

[pbmax]

This turn around has had more to do with McCarthy tightening up the leash (slightly and often temporarily depending on offensive flow) on Rodgers inclination to improvise and the receivers' ability to separate quickly vs. man coverage than any "creativity" he gained, or lack of it previously. He's a creative offensive mind, which was partially what caused some problems during the drought. The innovative "second level" attack is his brainchild, but like all innovations, there are often bumps in the road and adjustments to be made.

Rodgers and the whole offense benefits from some structure early, and then he can open up the second level attack once they get things going. The full arsenal of healthy receivers makes all the difference too.

I think this is true for this year with a banged up O line and featuring quicker throws. The Packers are near the top of the League in throws under 5 yards.

But I suspect that with Tackle health, Rodgers will have his freedom back. I don't think McCarthy works against that, I think he encourages it unless its going to get him killed because of 4 Guards on the O line.

[pbmax]

Agreed, which indicates that some mythical middle of the field attack change not only didn't impact the turnaround, but didn't exist in the first place.

I don't see how you can watch last year's offense with Cook and not say he is not attacking the middle of the field (and the defense). He wasn't lined up on the boundary.

This year they are running combos with Cobb and Bennett to shake Cobb open in the middle.

Have the total number of plays to the middle gone up? Probably not, they still prefer to attack the edges. But I think that red zone and 3rd down rankings reflect their play.

[pbmax]

So you're concluding, PB, that MM has worked his way out of that slump he was in?

Whew. I was tired of him trying to grit his teeth and force things. Great coaches roll with what they're given.

After the first pass through vince's numbers, I think McCarthy still does not change his play approach until there simply is no other choice. We have discussed that as a strength before and it is, because it helps the team perform at a high level and plug players in when the inevitable injuries strike. A consistent and simpler playbook works for more situations in today's NFL.

Rodgers helps him make this approach work by being able to operate well pre-snap, with audibles and extending plays. But even with Nelson, Cobb, Jones and a hole at TE, the offense struggled at times to get open against man even in 2014*.

So there is a limit. With Nelson hurt or recovering, being without a TE threat or a banged up Cobb, you have Rand's situation, where the players available need scheme help because the skill position talent aren't winning one on one. Adams and perhaps Allison are the exciting possible exceptions here.

Something I did not consider while writing this is that McCarthy, rather than redo his offense with scheme for basic plays this year, has redone his situational offense instead. So red zone and 3rd down as looking good so far, though we are in for a film adjustment period soon as D coordinators will have the full four weeks of film to review of the new offense starting this week.

The other thing is the TEs. They go 3 deep, each has some skill as a receiver Rodger's trusts, but all of them can block. Which really puts pressure on a D.



* The games versus Seattle (obviously great D), Detroit in Detroit and Buffalo (possibly one of the worst O games of M3/Rodgers career versus a great D on the road) come to mind. And games versus Fangio and the great 49er D during Harbaugh's tenure. Many of these games though were on the road though, which makes a discernible to the naked eye difference in the Packers pass protection.

Though I accept no excuses for the O's performance versus San Fran in the home playoff game in 2013. Seriously, the Defense stood up despite losing a corner and OLB in the first quarter and held. The Packer O at home was mediocre. On the other hand, the 2014 Offense lead the league in scoring. So we are talking about only a handful of plays. Problem is, several of them have been in the playoffs.

[red]

so, if tubby mcfatty didn't have #12, this is a 0-4 team

that seems about right

[mraynrand]

so, if tubby mcfatty didn't have #12, this is a 0-4 team

that seems about right

yawn

[mraynrand]

I don't see how you can watch last year's offense with Cook and not say he is not attacking the middle of the field (and the defense). He wasn't lined up on the boundary.

It just wasn't that many plays. 30 to Cook, 30 to Rodgers (and he caught a lot of those outside). Even Cook's most celebrated catch counts as an outside catch! 2015 Numbers are 58 for Rodgers and 11 for Perillo - and the total yards are pretty close to the same.

I do think that there was some influence with Cook in there, but not a ton.

[pbmax]

It just wasn't that many plays. 30 to Cook, 30 to Rodgers (and he caught a lot of those outside). Even Cook's most celebrated catch counts as an outside catch! 2015 Numbers are 58 for Rodgers and 11 for Perillo - and the total yards are pretty close to the same.

I do think that there was some influence with Cook in there, but not a ton.

30 catches on 51 targets though, and that was 5 starts and 10 games. And his return clearly sparked the offense.

Disregarding the semantic hole we are in danger of falling down, given where Cook and Rodgers lined up, they were covered by middle of the field defenders. Defenses weren't putting the #1 or #2 CB on them. They were covered by combinations of slot corners, safeties and linebackers.

And Cook's crossing routes did attack the center of the field. It is true also though, that his #1 route, especially early, was an flat/out. But remember, even on that route, he as pulling a slot corner with him.

But I am not trying to argue he changed his entire offense, I think his changes were modest. But he did need an infusion of matchup problems.

[pbmax]

so, if tubby mcfatty didn't have #12, this is a 0-4 team

that seems about right

No, if he had Alex Smith his offense would look very different. It looked different when he had Favre.

[vince]

I don't see how you can watch last year's offense with Cook and not say he is not attacking the middle of the field (and the defense). He wasn't lined up on the boundary.

This year they are running combos with Cobb and Bennett to shake Cobb open in the middle.

Have the total number of plays to the middle gone up? Probably not, they still prefer to attack the edges. But I think that red zone and 3rd down rankings reflect their play.

Regarding Cook and his Directional Play Frequency, I'm going by the objective data, not some vague statement(s) that tend to be developed to fit with an individual's narrative or understanding of reality. That said, if you want to include crossing routes from one side to the other outside boundary, that will even out over time. There's just nothing suggesting they changed their approach signficantly to attack the middle of the field upon their resurgence with Cook or someone else.


https://www.sharpfootballstats.com/d...ncy--off-.html

2016 Week 11-21 (Cook's Return from Injury and Roughly the Start of Offensive Resurgence)
TE Directional Play Frequency Distribution

Left - 40%
Middle - 18%
Right - 41%

Here are some (they don't have them all) of his routes charted by game.
Not definitive perhaps but I'd say informative. His route chart consistently (not exclusively) starts from TE position toward boundaries pretty consistently with the frequencies noted on the other data site.

https://nextgenstats.nfl.com/charts/...COO152641/2016


4 from right to left outside - 2 complete for 16 yds.
1 from right to middle - 0 complete for 0 yds.
0 from left to middle
1 from left to right outside - 1 complete for 18 yds.
3 left to left outside - 1 complete for TD 6 yds.
5 right to right outside - 4 complete for 56 yds.


1 from right to left outside - 1 complete for 35 yds.
1 from right to middle - 0 complete for 0 yds.
0 from left to middle - 0 complete for 0 yds.
1 from left to right outside - 1 complete for 18 yds.
2 left to left outside - 0 complete for 0 yds.
7 right to right outside - 4 complete for 61 yds. and TD


0 from right to left outside - 0 complete for 0 yds.
1 from right to middle - 0 complete for 0 yds.
1 from left to middle - 0 complete for 0 yds.
1 from left to right outside - 0 complete for 0 yds.
6 left to left outside - 3 complete for 48 yds. and TD
2 right to right outside - 2 complete for 57 yds.

Totals for 3 games featured
5 from right to left outside - 3 complete for 51 yds.
3 from right to middle - 0 complete for 0 yds.
1 from left to middle - 0 complete for 0 yds.
2 from left to right outside - 2 complete for 36 yds.
11 left to left outside - 4 complete for 54 yds. and 2 TD
14 right to right outside - 10 complete for 174 yds. and TD

[pbmax]

In those three games, I count 4 catches from the traditional TE spot or perhaps slot/wing, in the middle third of the field.

He might be headed left or right, but those routes traverse and are defended by interior defenders. I'd be curious the effect this had on Cobb and Monty's catches.

One thing they did not do with Cook, which surprised me even last year with his speed and height, was attack deep down the middle. His most common route was that flat route he ran while the WR ran a slant. McCarthy is still using that this year to get the ball out quickly.

[pbmax]

The remaining problems are running the ball (the best way to get a team out of Cover 2) and the deep ball.

The O line health status doesn't help there.

[red]

yawn

you're still here?

i thought you quit the packers for good when they started allowing blacks to think?

[mraynrand]

you're still here?

i thought you quit the packers for good when they started allowing blacks to think?

man are you a tool. Come over and debate in FYI if you have any balls.

[vince]

In those three games, I count 4 catches from the traditional TE spot or perhaps slot/wing, in the middle third of the field.

He might be headed left or right, but those routes traverse and are defended by interior defenders. I'd be curious the effect this had on Cobb and Monty's catches.

One thing they did not do with Cook, which surprised me even last year with his speed and height, was attack deep down the middle. His most common route was that flat route he ran while the WR ran a slant. McCarthy is still using that this year to get the ball out quickly.

Right I missed the run after catch on those. But even if we assume that they increased their middle of the field attack when they got their receiving TE back (The data I've seen still doesn't support any change to that effect. If anything it's slightly the opposite.) I don't see how that constitutes some kind of epiphany on McCarthy's part to become more creative and varied with playcalling and/or personnel groupings.

McCarthy said right from the start when Cook was signed that a TE who can attack the middle of the field is important and he brings that. So we all agree the threat is important. I also agree that it's interesting that they (with Cook at least) didn't actually do it more, perhaps because they continued to have far lower production when they did. It depends on defensive schemes and tendencies. Teams whose coverage schemes demand their inside backers to track receivers down the deep middle are soft there, but the Tampa 2 scheme where the deep safeties play wide and that's a key component isn't featured much throughout the league any more. 2 deep safety nickel and dime defenses where there's a guy on each hash 10 yards off the ball covering the seams from the get-go and a defender head up on the TE at the line disrupting his release also tend to negate that.

This is consistent with how the Packers offensive scheme operates (and pretty much always has under McCarthy) to put players in the best position to succeed through preparation, planning and dynamically attacking the defense where they're weakest as opposed to some new creative "scheming" (in your words) for new and more combinations of players and formation so they can throw it to Cook down the middle more by design because he's pretty good. The latter just hasn't and doesn't happen - not since that blew up with Finley one of the many years he got hurt.

The former has always and continues to be their approach - with improvements/adjustments related to player health/available skill level, offensive play style, tempo, rhythm, etc. designed to take advantage of the unique skills and intelligence of their QB to first attack by plan with quick release and accuracy based on tendency, but then also with opportunities that creates for what they really want/need to win - to capitalize on their unique and highly effective competitive advantage - their QB's off-the-charts football IQ and his unprecedented ability to extend plays, see things before they're there - and deliver the ball downfield with velocity, accuracy, and timeliness.

Defenses adjusted to prevent all that. For awhile they succeeded (they still do to varying degrees) because 1) the Packers committed too much to their "second phase" attack right from the start of games before establishing the fast pace tempo and play style that they've found it needs to succeed, and 2) the Packers receivers were unsuccessful in separating from man coverage and/or the QB was more averse to throwing into tighter windows associated with shorter throws.

Then the Packers adjusted with simpler attack and emphasis on getting into rhythm to establish play style and speed up game tempo to their advantage and enable Rodgers to be more effective at the things he's uniquely good at. It's been strategic adjustments to overcome what defenses did to offset all that more than tactical adjustments to personnel groups, formations and/or the plays they run. Those change (or not) game to game based on opponent and how they think they can exploit the defensive scheme, match-ups, etc. they think they'll encounter as well as the status of their own lineup, player health, availability, strengths, exposures, etc.

Maybe McCarthy errs at times by overestimating his guys or expecting too much from them (not a bad flaw if you're a football coach), but it's not nor ever has been because of a lack of ability or willingness to "scheme". Sometimes injuries, experience and/or ability means the other guy wins. Notwithstanding the possibility of an elusive solution to injury trends that have impacted them in specific areas (as it relates to the scope of this thread), I think McCarthy is among the elites at getting his guys ready and putting them in the best position possible to succeed throughout the game.