More Banjo: Week 7 vs Bears

[pbmax]

Its a win and the second half was very pretty. D injured some guys and might be costing Fox his job. Nice work fellas.

Bad side: Jackson injured not return. Lang injured but returned. Rodgers had a cramp in his calf.

[pbmax]

[pbmax]

[pbmax]

Club Twitter account phone has apparently gone dead.

Michael Cohen ‏@Michael_Cohen13 21m21 minutes ago
Mike McCarthy said Davante Adams cleared the concussion protocol today. Packers found out he was available around 1 p.m. #Packers

Green Bay Packers ‏@packers 17m17 minutes ago
McCarthy: Good division victory...Really proud of our football team with the amount of adjustments we had to make throughout the week.

ITS BACK

Green Bay Packers ‏@packers 19m19 minutes ago
McCarthy: Good division victory...Really proud of our football team with the amount of adjustments we had to make throughout the week.

Green Bay Packers ‏@packers 16m16 minutes ago
McCarthy: I thought Aaron did an excellent job managing all the things going on throughout the game. No-huddle was very effective.

MORE NO HUDDLE. YAY.

Green Bay Packers ‏@packers 15m15 minutes ago
McCarthy on Aaron Rodgers: I thought he was very patient. We knew this was going to be a different ride tonight. Game plan was to pass.

Green Bay Packers ‏@packers 13m13 minutes ago
McCarthy: Davante (Adams) & Ty Montgomery were given a lot of opportunities, we definitely took advantage.

[pbmax]

Green Bay Packers ‏@packers 9m9 minutes ago
Aaron Rodgers: Different walking into the locker room & seeing a white jersey. I thought we looked good. I liked the Color Rush.

Green Bay Packers ‏@packers 7m7 minutes ago
Rodgers: Really proud of Ty Montgomery. Lot to build on...He has a very good feel on routes out of backfield. He had great focus this week.

Green Bay Packers ‏@packers 4m4 minutes ago
Rodgers: Biggest takeaways were the protection & Davante (Adams) playing so well. We felt good about his matchup.

Green Bay Packers ‏@packers 42s43 seconds ago
Rodgers: To throw the ball 56 times & still have an overwhelming advantage in the time of possession is rare. #CHIvsGB

[Bossman641]

Team has a mini break here before atlanta. Really important to get Randall and Rollins healthy

[SMBASS]

Kudos to Cobb, Monty, and Davante for stepping up and having great games when it was really needed. Especially Monty and Davonte. Good to see Rodgers get back on track a little bit better too. D also played pretty well tonight although it's a little tainted considering the MASH unit from Chicago that they were going against. Seemed like with the long drives the O was putting together the D was barely on the field in the 2nd half.

[King Friday]

Wasn't a debacle...but we simply can't beat any good teams going forward without any semblance of a run game. Adams should gain a lot of confidence from this game, which I think is big for him. Monty has proven to be a capable piece in the backfield that can create some real matchup nightmares once we actually have real RBs to use too.

My only real downer from last night was the play of Nelson. I'm starting to worry that he may be starting to quickly fall off the map in terms of being a downfield threat. He simply doesn't seem to have the speed he once had. On a night where Rodgers was looking to pass continually, Nelson was hardly noticeable. I think Janis is going to have to be used more if we want someone capable of taking the top off the defense.

[Fritz]

Here are my thoughts on the game and the season:

1. Jeff Janis played ahead of Ty Davis - he's passed somebody on the depth chart! Hooray!

2. The announcers - was it Boomer Esiason? And Deion Sanders, too - kept slathering over Rodgers and blaming the wide receivers. Nobody's open, they said. Look at the replays. Well, when I looked at them, sure, I didn't see anyone standing alone. But I saw receivers with a step on defenders. And didn't everybody used to worship at Rodgers's feet for "throwing guys open"? I distinctly remember that as one the the traits that made him so good. But now it's the receivers' fault. I don't get it. Rodgers still can move around the pocket, better than anyone. But all this back-foot throwing - he's missing lots of passes, and what a bunch of pussy announcers for continuing to nibble and lick at Rodgers's berries. He missed Adams twice, missed Cobb twice, I think, and on that 44 yard pass intereference, a well-thrown ball would've meant a touchdown. In other words, the stuff Rodgers used to do, he isn't doing - at least as far as his accuracy. I think, as I said elsewhere, that he's lost confidence in his ability to fire a strike into a narrow window.

3. I was one of the many Packerrats complaining bitterly when Sitton was cut. But Sitton missed the game, and nobody's talking about Lane Taylor - which means he's doing just fine. Let's all eat some crow here. Speaking of eating crow...

4. Bretsky? How 'bout that Fresno Fraud???

5. Okay, lots of bitching about Thompson not having running back depth. Okay. Really? Nobody has running back depth after the top two go down. And that running back depth we wanted? That was supposed to be a third-down, guy-out-of-the-backfield-who-can-catch guy. So even if the Packers had that guy, he would be as useless as a bronze tit on first and second down. So let's be realistic about how much Ted's at fault here. Who - realistically - was he supposed to have ready?

6. The Bears still suck.

[run pMc]

Did Rodgers look more accurate and poised to you?
Were the WRs that good or was the Bears secondary that bad?

[SkinBasket]

2. The announcers - was it Boomer Esiason? And Deion Sanders, too - kept slathering over Rodgers and blaming the wide receivers. Nobody's open, they said. Look at the replays. Well, when I looked at them, sure, I didn't see anyone standing alone. But I saw receivers with a step on defenders. And didn't everybody used to worship at Rodgers's feet for "throwing guys open"? I distinctly remember that as one the the traits that made him so good. But now it's the receivers' fault. I don't get it. Rodgers still can move around the pocket, better than anyone. But all this back-foot throwing - he's missing lots of passes, and what a bunch of pussy announcers for continuing to nibble and lick at Rodgers's berries. He missed Adams twice, missed Cobb twice, I think, and on that 44 yard pass intereference, a well-thrown ball would've meant a touchdown. In other words, the stuff Rodgers used to do, he isn't doing - at least as far as his accuracy. I think, as I said elsewhere, that he's lost confidence in his ability to fire a strike into a narrow window.

I think they were just countering McGinn's hit piece on Rodgers from this past week. But I'm not sure, because I didn't read it.

I agree that Rodgers needs to get a little more brave, but really, these receivers are not doing their job. You can blame lack of speed, lack of skill, poor position coaching, poor play calling, or whatever, but in 56 passing plays, often with 4 or 5 WRs on the field, they broke open, what... twice? Three times?

And for every time Rodgers misses, there seems to be a drop.

So yes, Rodgers could be more accurate and more adventure-prone. But for the most part, I agreed with the voices last night. We have an alleged embarrassment of riches at the position, but we ain't spending any.

[Cheesehead Craig]

Montgomery and Adams had a wonderful coming out party last night. Stats look good when Rodgers throws that many times, but Adams suddenly got James Jones hands and actually got open. Montgomery showed all his tools.

After this season, it's time to cut bait with Abby and Janis. Janis looks lost out there and it's been how many years now? He route-running is shit that doesn't involve him just running a fly pattern, and I can't remember the last time I saw him getting open. He's an athlete, but not a WR. Abby simply cannot stay healthy, his roster spot would be better served by having a 3rd RB.

[Maxie the Taxi]

5. Okay, lots of bitching about Thompson not having running back depth. Okay. Really? Nobody has running back depth after the top two go down. And that running back depth we wanted? That was supposed to be a third-down, guy-out-of-the-backfield-who-can-catch guy. So even if the Packers had that guy, he would be as useless as a bronze tit on first and second down. So let's be realistic about how much Ted's at fault here. Who - realistically - was he supposed to have ready?

A bit of hyperbole there. Up until this year the Packers themselves had a fairly capable 3rd string RB. Wasn't that Crockett before he got injured? And there were others before him. And obviously Kansas City had not only a 3rd string RB on the roster, but a 4th stringer: Knife Davis. I didn't check but a think just about all NFL teams carry a 3rd RB on the roster and then another on the practice squad.

And as far as a "guy-out-of-the-backfield-who-can-catch guy," he doesn't have to be next to "useless." Monty himself destroys that argument. And do I have to bring up guys like David Johnson and even Jordan Howard who is still listed on the Bears depth chart as their 3rd string RB. Guys like Howard were available in the draft and plentiful as free agents.

I think TT and Stubby reasoned Monty was their guy who could step in. Whether that makes sense is a whole nother issue.

[Zool]

I think they were just countering McGinn's hit piece on Rodgers from this past week. But I'm not sure, because I didn't read it.

I agree that Rodgers needs to get a little more brave, but really, these receivers are not doing their job. You can blame lack of speed, lack of skill, poor position coaching, poor play calling, or whatever, but in 56 passing plays, often with 4 or 5 WRs on the field, they broke open, what... twice? Three times?

And for every time Rodgers misses, there seems to be a drop.

So yes, Rodgers could be more accurate and more adventure-prone. But for the most part, I agreed with the voices last night. We have an alleged embarrassment of riches at the position, but we ain't spending any.

Part of the issue is the slow WRs, part of that is on Stubbs not adjusting formations, part of that is on Rodgers (until the second half lastnight) not willing the ball to his receivers hands like he used to do at will.

The first half was a lot of pro set with 2 wide, a TE with a hand in the dirt, Rip at FB and Monty at RB. With a secondary as beat up as Chicago's was, stack 3 wide often. Look at the 3rd TD when the rub caused 2 DBs to go with the same WR because they weren't communicating well. That could be bread and butter right now.

[Harlan Huckleby]

My only real downer from last night was the play of Nelson. I'm starting to worry that he may be starting to quickly fall off the map in terms of being a downfield threat. He simply doesn't seem to have the speed he once had. On a night where Rodgers was looking to pass continually, Nelson was hardly noticeable. I think Janis is going to have to be used more if we want someone capable of taking the top off the defense.

Nelson was limping.most of the game. It seems likely that he is now a highly paid rotation guy.

[Fritz]

A bit of hyperbole there. Up until this year the Packers themselves had a fairly capable 3rd string RB. Wasn't that Crockett before he got injured? And there were others before him. And obviously Kansas City had not only a 3rd string RB on the roster, but a 4th stringer: Knife Davis. I didn't check but a think just about all NFL teams carry a 3rd RB on the roster and then another on the practice squad.

And as far as a "guy-out-of-the-backfield-who-can-catch guy," he doesn't have to be next to "useless." Monty himself destroys that argument. And do I have to bring up guys like David Johnson and even Jordan Howard who is still listed on the Bears depth chart as their 3rd string RB. Guys like Howard were available in the draft and plentiful as free agents.

I think TT and Stubby reasoned Monty was their guy who could step in. Whether that makes sense is a whole nother issue.

Dann straight it's hyperbole! This is Packerrats, baby!

You do undermine your own argument - they did have a solid third stronger. He got hurt, Crockett did.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Dann straight it's hyperbole! This is Packerrats, baby!

You do undermine your own argument - they did have a solid third stronger. He got hurt, Crockett did.

And TT didn't replace him...And that's the issue...just saying.

[Harlan Huckleby]

A bit of hyperbole there. Up until this year the Packers themselves had a fairly capable 3rd string RB. Wasn't that Crockett before he got injured? And there were others before him. And obviously Kansas City had not only a 3rd string RB on the roster, but a 4th stringer: Knife Davis. I didn't check but a think just about all NFL teams carry a 3rd RB on the roster and then another on the practice squad.

And as far as a "guy-out-of-the-backfield-who-can-catch guy," he doesn't have to be next to "useless." Monty himself destroys that argument. And do I have to bring up guys like David Johnson and even Jordan Howard who is still listed on the Bears depth chart as their 3rd string RB. Guys like Howard were available in the draft and plentiful as free agents.

I think TT and Stubby reasoned Monty was their guy who could step in. Whether that makes sense is a whole nother issue.

Boom! Good smackdown.

[pbmax]

No one except Monty (and Adams if his guy is playing off) in the WR corp is beating press coverage decisively. The defenders are RARELY wrong footed or confused. Compare that to the Packer DBs, even before injuries.

That is because they KNOW what routes are being run because there are maybe four per receiver total, and maybe two per any personnel group, because it rarely varies and they almost never get forced off the press due to crossing routes or mesh points. I think I saw five instances of tight combo routes in 75 plays (one for a TD that should have been easier).

How many times was that rookie DB in Cobb's hip pocket on throws inside? There is no hesitation on their part.

So could Rodgers be more accurate? Yes. But why make all but five throws that difficult? Might that make you QB skittish, waiting for something to break MORE wide open and lead to more dropped balls from challenged receivers? Why make a difficult game MORE difficult?

See how all of this connects to the design of the stupid play? Think of the advantage the defense is giving you. EVERY team is playing man under. You know that going in. You can design an offense to abuse that choice for an entire half and scare teams into choosing something else. But no, let's bang our head against the wall of fundamentals.

I actually thought for two weeks he was going back to multiple personnel groups, but except for Monty in a new spot, the differing personnel were still all running isolation routes. There were a couple of receiver stacks, but the routes never collided.

A healthy Nelson makes this easier. But why rely on having an All-Pro as part of the design of the offense?

[ThunderDan]

Janis has to go if he continues what he was doing last night. He took a kick out of the end zone and got to the 15 yard line. He did cover one punt well but was helped by some good hang time.

The play that surprised me was the little flare to Janis on the goal line. He was running at full speed turned up to get into the end zone and the CB knocked him backwards and stopped him from scoring. If Janis is such and athletic freak he has to knock the CB back not vice versa.