Packers, Finley leaning towards long-term deal, agent says

[SnakeLH2006]

http://packersnews.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20120119/PKR01/120119136/Packers-Finley-leaning-towards-long-term-deal-agent-says-?odyssey=mod|newswell|text|GPG-Sports|p (http://packersnews.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20120119/PKR01/120119136/Packers-Finley-leaning-towards-long-term-deal-agent-says-?odyssey=mod%7Cnewswell%7Ctext%7CGPG-Sports%7Cp)

The Green Bay Packers are interested in signing Jermichael Finley to a long-term deal and would rather not use the franchise tag on the tight end, Finley’s agent said Thursday.“We’ve been speaking and they’ve made it clear they would like him to be back there, and Jermichael’s made it clear he would like to be back there,” Blake Baratz said. “Now that the season’s over there’s a little more time to focus on the particulars.”
The two sides had several discussions throughout the season, though there is no immediate time frame on getting a deal done.
The primary issue seems to be finding a number acceptable to both sides for a young player (Finley will be 25 on March 26) who has yet to reach his potential and has an impact on the offense that isn’t measurable by statistics.
Finley (6-foot-5, 247 pounds) along with the New England Patriots’ Rob Gronkowski and the New Orleans Saints’ Jimmy Graham are the new breed of tight end that present mismatch issues for defenses and play more like giant receivers than traditional tight ends.
Finley put up career highs with 55 receptions, 767 yards, 8 touchdowns and 14 catches of 20-plus yards in 2011. He also had 11 drops, according to STATS.
If the sides cannot agree on a long-term deal, the Packers have the option to place the franchise tag on Finley. FootballOutsiders.com predicts the tight end franchise tender to be between $5.416 million and $5.624 million. The transition tender is expected to be in the $4.673 million to $4.852 million range, but the Packers are unlikely to use that option.
Finley’s camp might request being franchised as a receiver since he plays wide and in the slot nearly as much as with his hand on the ground.
“He’s a tight end, but he also plays the (No.) 1 receiver (position) and the No. 2 slot sometimes and plays in the (No.) 1 slot to the three-man side,” coach Mike McCarthy said Wednesday. “Those are the type of things when playing in a multiple offense, and we treat all the perimeter players the same, cause it’s about match-ups, they have to play all the positions.”
The receivers’ franchise is predicted to be between $9.443 million and $9.806 million with the transition tag between $8.477 million and $8.802 million.

--------------------------------------------

Look..this guy has unbelievable talent and a 2 cent head. Snake met him drinking...just a punk...and the tally goes to 2 gals I know he's cheated on his wife with in the past two years. I can handle T.O. in his prime, but at least T.O. was elite on the field. Let him go..Ya..we wanna save the tag for Flynn for a trade for draft picks...bet we sign Finley and he sucks after the money else we'd have locked him up.

[Tarlam!]

Letting him walk without a serious effort to keeping him is silly. I've called for TT to let him walk in the past, because he really rubs me the wrong way occasionally, but M3 seems to think he's worth the addional baby-sitting investment.

Sure, he's a tweet happy, look-at-me punk. He's not the only womanizer in the NFL but I doubt that makes him a lock to sell the playbook to the Bears. It's none of our business anyway(consenting adults).

It has taken Finley long enough to learn the job and looking at other TEs, e.g. Vernon Davis, it seems par for the course. The Packers have servicable TEs, but none with the potential of Finley IMHO.

A 4 year contract with a heavy tilt towards incentives, including annual roster bonuses rather than a huge signing bonus. Cutting him shouldn't provide lots of dead cap money, but the league is leaning to contracts with guaranteed money. Glad I don't have TT's job.

[pittstang5]

So when can teams start signing their own "to be" free agents. I know other teams can start signing free agents at the begining of the new league year which is in March, but what about their own.

[MJZiggy]

So when can teams start signing their own "to be" free agents. I know other teams can start signing free agents at the begining of the new league year which is in March, but what about their own.

I believe teams can resign their own players at any time.

[pittstang5]

I believe teams can resign their own players at any time.

Cool, wasn't sure. Thought maybe there was a deadline date, kinda like the trade deadline.

[woodbuck27]

The choice I wanted was:

Do we risk paying him top money when he needs to get it to there in terms of consistency catching and securing the ball. Showing BIG play potential and real strength asurity in terms of blocking assignments or at least accept platooning when we need a blocker at TE.

JF has to be assigment sure and he is NOT there yet.

He drops way too many and that frustrates Aaron Rodgers and OUR offense. Somehow MM goes back ..always back to Jermichael Finley and we will likely see him get payed.

Final analysis. Will this be a great decision...think. Time will tell us.

We need an assignment sure TE and ONLY use TOP SHELF TE CAP money for such a TE.

Do not pay for what you do not have.

[Kiwon]

Finley (6-foot-5, 247 pounds) along with the New England Patriots’ Rob Gronkowski and the New Orleans Saints’ Jimmy Graham are the new breed of tight end that present mismatch issues for defenses and play more like giant receivers than traditional tight ends.


The difference being that Gronk and Graham can make the catch.

They should show him two contracts - the "real" contract and another one as if he had caught the balls he dropped this season. Maybe leaving money on the table would motivate him to improve his performance.

[Scott Campbell]

I suspect the reason the Packers don't want to franchise him anymore is that he didn't play well enough to command that kind of dough. This is one where Ted was probably fortunate for not extending him during the season.

[woodbuck27]

The difference being that Gronk and Graham can make the catch.

They should show him two contracts - the "real" contract and another one as if he had caught the balls he dropped this season. Maybe leaving money on the table would motivate him to improve his performance.

ROB GRONKOWSKI and JIMMY GRAHAM..........................................j. finley.

[sheepshead]

M3 likes him, he's coming back.

[Smeefers]

He pisses me off a lot, but I don't think we've seen the best from him. I say bring him back. He's very good at what he does, even with the drops. I trust TT to get a home team deal from him, he's not going to bust the bank. He's not going to be a top 5 pay guy. If he wants to make a ton of money, he's going to have to go to a bad team and I'm not sure he wants to do that. Bottom line, he's near the top of a short list of great TE's, you keep him.

[pbmax]

I am not sure that column is anything more than a soft pressure play by the agent. Notice almost each scenario plays to his favor. Packers don't want to use tag, they might have to tag as a WR, each side prefers long term deal, etc.

I am sure in the abstract all those things are true (except WR tag, unless its a negotiated agreement, I can't see Finley winning this one) but that doesn't mean there is any general agreement on terms or any movement.

Intentional or not, it seems targered to create a sense of the inevitable, which won't play as well on Lombardi Ave like as it will with the public.

Unless he wins an appeal on the WR tag, the Packers have all the leverage except for a few choice quotes from their coach.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I suspect the reason the Packers don't want to franchise him anymore is that he didn't play well enough to command that kind of dough. This is one where Ted was probably fortunate for not extending him during the season.

I think he'll get the money that he'd get from the tag, but they may want to use the tag on Wells. Maybe the Packers are closer to a deal with Finley than Wells.

[Patler]

Tag value for O-line is projected to be $9.4 million. Would they really want to pay Wells that much?

[Joemailman]

I think he'll get the money that he'd get from the tag, but they may want to use the tag on Wells. Maybe the Packers are closer to a deal with Finley than Wells.

I get the sense that Finley really wants to return to Green Bay. Wells may still have a chip on his shoulder from a few years ago when MM pretty much handed Wells' starting job to Spitz. While Wells would likely sign with the Packers if the money is there, he's not going to give the Packers any kind of home team discount.

[Pugger]

Tag value for O-line is projected to be $9.4 million. Would they really want to pay Wells that much?

What do the other O linemen make?

[woodbuck27]

Tag value for O-line is projected to be $9.4 million. Would they really want to pay Wells that much?

Go back to 2004. What became of our OL immediately after that loss of talent to FA?

Now we are looking at a center and not two talented guards. How much do you value Wells over Finley is another consideration all together.

[Joemailman]

What do the other O linemen make?

Not that much. http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/green-bay-packers/

[Brandon494]

Look..this guy has unbelievable talent and a 2 cent head. Snake met him drinking...just a punk...and the tally goes to 2 gals I know he's cheated on his wife with in the past two years. I can handle T.O. in his prime, but at least T.O. was elite on the field. Let him go..Ya..we wanna save the tag for Flynn for a trade for draft picks...bet we sign Finley and he sucks after the money else we'd have locked him up.

Dude give me a break, you don't know any girls that hooked up with Finley. Sounds to me that he brushed off a drunk fan at the bar and someone took it the wrong way.

[Zool]

Dude give me a break, you don't know any girls that hooked up with Finley. Sounds to me that he brushed off a drunk fan at the bar and someone took it the wrong way.

You can't know that. I bet people probably said the exact same thing about Favre back in the mid 90's.

Finley needs lasic or something. He doesn't see the ball well. The ball the did catch on the first drive, he was late getting his hands to the ball.

[denverYooper]

You can't know that. I bet people probably said the exact same thing about Favre back in the mid 90's.
.

While not perfectly knowable, I'd definitely bet on black here.

[ND72]

I've been as much of a anti-Finley guy lately as anyone, but I fully realize how important Finley can be for us...plus, he's what, 24 years old? can't let a guy who is still developing at 24 years old and is already as much a threat as he is walk. Maybe a full off season with Rodgers will help...maybe some marriage counciling with Rodgers would help.

[Smidgeon]

The difference being that Gronk and Graham can make the catch.

They should show him two contracts - the "real" contract and another one as if he had caught the balls he dropped this season. Maybe leaving money on the table would motivate him to improve his performance.

Finley can too. He just had an off year. His catch rate last year was phenomenal until he went down.

[Upnorth]

I say give him a very high potential contract but with half or more of the value being incentive based. Give him the oppertunity to be the highest paid TE in the league, but to do that he would need a 95% catch rate, 1200 yrds and 14 tds. I say give him a social media clause.

[ND72]

I say give him a very high potential contract but with half or more of the value being incentive based. Give him the oppertunity to be the highest paid TE in the league, but to do that he would need a 95% catch rate, 1200 yrds and 14 tds. I say give him a social media clause.

BINGO

[Teamcheez1]

I'm willing to sign him to a very good contract in the hopes he will become a superstar like Antonio Gates or Tony Gonzalez.

I just hope he's not the next Kellen Winslow.

[Joemailman]

I say give him a very high potential contract but with half or more of the value being incentive based. Give him the oppertunity to be the highest paid TE in the league, but to do that he would need a 95% catch rate, 1200 yrds and 14 tds. I say give him a social media clause.

The danger with a contract like that is that he becomes too interested in his own personal statistics. In order for a receiver to get gaudy statistics, he has to be thrown to a lot. I could see a guy like Finley getting disgruntled if he's not getting enough balls thrown to him to achieve those stats.

[Smidgeon]

The danger with a contract like that is that he becomes too interested in his own personal statistics. In order for a receiver to get gaudy statistics, he has to be thrown to a lot. I could see a guy like Finley getting disgruntled if he's not getting enough balls thrown to him to achieve those stats.

Good point. However, if he's producing, he'll get the ball thrown his way. Conversely, you could incentivize towards catch rate and number of offensive snaps (as a percentage) combined with offensive production while he's on the field. It'd be a really convoluted way (read: impractical so it won't happen) way of using incentives, but at least that way it'd be tailored to his skills and field effect.

[mraynrand]

I say give him a social media clause.

he gets a bonus if he doesn't tweet from his igloo?

http://i453.photobucket.com/albums/qq254/mraynrand/FinleyIgloo.jpg

[ThunderDan]

I suspect the reason the Packers don't want to franchise him anymore is that he didn't play well enough to command that kind of dough. This is one where Ted was probably fortunate for not extending him during the season.

Exactly, you don't tag a player with the drops.

TT and Finely's agent will work out a contract before they need to tag him. 4 years $18M.

[sharpe1027]

If they don't spend the money on Finley, will it go to better use somewhere else? If not, pay the man or the team will be worse off overall. I think they have the cap room to keep him without big sacrifices elsewhere. I would rather have them resign Finley than use the money to roll the dice on other FAs.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Exactly, you don't tag a player with the drops.

TT and Finely's agent will work out a contract before they need to tag him. 4 years $18M.

I'd be willing to offer up a friendly wager that he gets more, on average, than that. I'd say he'll get more than $5m/year and probably something at or over the TE franchise number.

[HarveyWallbangers]

If they don't spend the money on Finley, will it go to better use somewhere else? If not, pay the man or the team will be worse off overall. I think they have the cap room to keep him without big sacrifices elsewhere. I would rather have them resign Finley than use the money to roll the dice on other FAs.

I think they need to keep this offense mostly in tact. I think they can do that without breaking the bank. If they let go of Driver, Clifton, and Grant, I'm assuming that it would cover what they'd need to retain Wells and Finley. Flynn will also be gone. Of course, they need to look into extending Jennings and Rodgers. Then, in the draft concentrate on DEFENSE + developmental QB and developmental OL. If a dynamic RB drops to us, we'd have to take a look at him also.

[Upnorth]

Exactly, you don't tag a player with the drops.

TT and Finely's agent will work out a contract before they need to tag him. 4 years $18M.

If we get him at that level TT would have stolen Finley. TE values are going up, and this is cheap for a 25 year old top 7 TE.

[sharpe1027]

I think they need to keep this offense mostly in tact. I think they can do that without breaking the bank. If they let go of Driver, Clifton, and Grant, I'm assuming that it would cover what they'd need to retain Wells and Finley. Flynn will also be gone. Of course, they need to look into extending Jennings and Rodgers. Then, in the draft concentrate on DEFENSE + developmental QB and developmental OL. If a dynamic RB drops to us, we'd have to take a look at him also.

Agreed. Turnover is OK so long as you gain an advantage by letting a player go and bringing in a new player. Not signing Finley because he dropped a few passes does not improve the team. They don't want to overpay, but they have not reason to save money unless they think that they can spend it more wisely somewhere else.

[woodbuck27]

I say give him a very high potential contract but with half or more of the value being incentive based. Give him the oppertunity to be the highest paid TE in the league, but to do that he would need a 95% catch rate, 1200 yrds and 14 tds. I say give him a social media clause.

(-: .... Gee.

How about a 80% reception rate,700 yards and 8 TD's? Maybe.... just a simple herb like Valerian might calm him down.

[woodbuck27]

I think they need to keep this offense mostly in tact. I think they can do that without breaking the bank. If they let go of Driver, Clifton, and Grant, I'm assuming that it would cover what they'd need to retain Wells and Finley. Flynn will also be gone. Of course, they need to look into extending Jennings and Rodgers. Then, in the draft concentrate on DEFENSE + developmental QB and developmental OL. If a dynamic RB drops to us, we'd have to take a look at him also.


" If they let go of Driver, Clifton, and Grant," HW

Reality Therapy Vs Reality. Donald Driver.....ahhhh?!! Leadership.

Ted Thompson.

[Pugger]

I think they need to keep this offense mostly in tact. I think they can do that without breaking the bank. If they let go of Driver, Clifton, and Grant, I'm assuming that it would cover what they'd need to retain Wells and Finley. Flynn will also be gone. Of course, they need to look into extending Jennings and Rodgers. Then, in the draft concentrate on DEFENSE + developmental QB and developmental OL. If a dynamic RB drops to us, we'd have to take a look at him also.

I think you speak the truth here about what may happen.

[pbmax]

I would be stunned if Wells gets top shelf money at C. Even with Thompson's recent investments in the O line, he has not paid top dollar since Cliffy's big resigning after flirting with the Redskins.

Thompson has not seemed to mind whether the replacement is apparent on the roster or not, but being a playoff contender might shift the equation.

[Pugger]

I say give him a very high potential contract but with half or more of the value being incentive based. Give him the oppertunity to be the highest paid TE in the league, but to do that he would need a 95% catch rate, 1200 yrds and 14 tds. I say give him a social media clause.

95%???? Let's be real here. Even Megatron, who most think is the best WR in football had a 61% catch rate in 2011. Jordy was 71%, Jennings 66%, DD 66% and Jones 69%.

[mmmdk]

Catch, Finley, catch! :lol: Great if a long term deal is reached; I sure want the youngster kept in Green'n'Gold.

[Upnorth]

95%???? Let's be real here. Even Megatron, who most think is the best WR in football had a 61% catch rate in 2011. Jordy was 71%, Jennings 66%, DD 66% and Jones 69%.

95% is unreal, but I said highest paid TE at that level. If he catches at 75% I am happy, just don't pay him insane amounts of money. I am looking for incentives in his contract. Realistic incentives go against the cap, unrealistic don't. Let him shoot for the moon but make him earn it. I do admit 95% is probably impossible, what do you think it should be to be top paid TE?

[Smidgeon]

95%???? Let's be real here. Even Megatron, who most think is the best WR in football had a 61% catch rate in 2011. Jordy was 71%, Jennings 66%, DD 66% and Jones 69%.

I think Finley was above 85% last year before getting hurt. I don't remember exactly though.

[Pugger]

95% is unreal, but I said highest paid TE at that level. If he catches at 75% I am happy, just don't pay him insane amounts of money. I am looking for incentives in his contract. Realistic incentives go against the cap, unrealistic don't. Let him shoot for the moon but make him earn it. I do admit 95% is probably impossible, what do you think it should be to be top paid TE?

If the top WR is in the 60s then a TE who is more of a catcher than a blocker should have similar numbers. I don't think Finley should be paid top TE dollar until he shows he's worth it.

[Patler]

95%???? Let's be real here. Even Megatron, who most think is the best WR in football had a 61% catch rate in 2011. Jordy was 71%, Jennings 66%, DD 66% and Jones 69%.

Depends what you mean by "catch rate", catchable balls or targeted passes. You are referring to targeted passes. I suspect Upnorth was referring to drops. A drop rate of 5% (95% catch rate of catchable balls) would be outstanding, but not completely unreal. On the other hand, a drop rate of 30%-40% (catch rate of 60%-70% of catchable balls) would be absolutely horrible.

[King Friday]

Tough to offer him an incentive deal on a team where the ball is going to get spread between 4-5 different receivers who all are very good. He can't do what Gronk and Graham do, even if he caught every pass thrown to him. The Pats and Saints don't have the depth at WR that we have, so their TEs see a lot more action.

Can't see Ted willing to pay more than $4M a year to the kid...can't see the kid accepting less than $4M prior to FA. Despite all the happy talk, I don't think this is going to end with a contract anytime soon.

[Cheesehead Craig]

I believe that TT is gonna pay Finley more than what many here think we should. Just have a feeling. Finley's got upside still and TT loves the players who are still ascending.

[Bretsky]

5 Yr 27 MIL is my guess

[Pugger]

Depends what you mean by "catch rate", catchable balls or targeted passes. You are referring to targeted passes. I suspect Upnorth was referring to drops. A drop rate of 5% (95% catch rate of catchable balls) would be outstanding, but not completely unreal. On the other hand, a drop rate of 30%-40% (catch rate of 60%-70% of catchable balls) would be absolutely horrible.

I scoured the internet looking for drop rates without much success.

[Patler]

I scoured the internet looking for drop rates without much success.

Ya, I have seen Finley "credited" with anywhere from 11 to 16 drops this season, depending on who does the evaluation. Even targeted passes can be misleading, because a sideline throw-away, or a throw out of the back of the endzone can be counted as targeted pass to the nearest receiver, even if the QB was just getting rid of it.

[smuggler]

A drop rate of 39% would quickly have Megatron out of the league. He catches 61% of passes thrown his way. Meanwhile, Finley had 13 drops in the reguar season.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Drops have not been a problem with Finley. Like Nelson last year, I think it's a one year fluke and he'll rebound with a monster year. Hopefully, for the Packers.

[smuggler]

Stats, Inc. (hosted.stats.com) is my source for drops. Drops are listed on the profile pages of WRs but not on the pages of TEs and RBs. However, since Finley had so many, he was in the league 'leader' section and that's how I know he officially had 10+ on the season.

[pbmax]

In the general world of NFL statistical info, drops are mostly proprietary and highly subjective. Those numbers, unless you subscribe to a stat service or they get mentioned in wire copy, are usually out of the public realm. Teams obviously have their own calculations. So comparing drops is tricky since not all of the data appears at once and can be hard to compile. Its also tough to figure the source in reported stories.

Targets, on the other hand (and Catch Rate) while they do suffer from the problem Patler has mentioned, are at least in the public realm (they are logged in the GameBooks the NFL keeps) and are published for each game immediately after the end of the game. Drops might tell you something about a particular receiver at a given time, but targets/catch rate will be better across teams, years and multiple players.

[smuggler]

The number of times a receiver is targeted per play is also a big indication of how often they are able to get open. Jimmy Graham, Wes Welker, Calvin Johnson are more likely to beat their man than some other guys in the league.

[Fritz]

I'm willing to sign him to a very good contract in the hopes he will become a superstar like Antonio Gates or Tony Gonzalez.

I just hope he's not the next Kellen Winslow.

If you ever saw Kellen Winslow's dad play (Kellen Sr.) you'd say you'd be happy if Finley was as good as Kellen Winslow (senior). Dude was great.

[Joemailman]

http://www.espnmilwaukee.com/corp/page/01%2F18%2F12_Finley%27s_game_needs_detailing/402?feed=2

Good article by Jason Wilde on Finley.

[MadtownPacker]

Drops have not been a problem with Finley. Like Nelson last year, I think it's a one year fluke and he'll rebound with a monster year. Hopefully, for the Packers.
I think you are right. He is the kind of weaker minded individual who would let the contract year fuck with him. If you can see this from the 13" B&W tv in your trailer Im sure TT will see it too.

[Lurker64]

If you have a guy with the upside of Finley who flashes the ability to reach his potential, you absolutely give him a second contract. The issue is whether he gets a third.

There is no reason to let Finley walk. You work out a long-term deal, and if you can't you franchise him and work out a long-term deal during the summer with the leverage of the tag looming overhead.

[pbmax]

If you ever saw Kellen Winslow's dad play (Kellen Sr.) you'd say you'd be happy if Finley was as good as Kellen Winslow (senior). Dude was great.

Kellen Winslow Sr. single handedly destroyed teams in the playoffs. If Gronk or Graham can block a FG in a playoff game to keep their team alive, then they might be onto something.

[denverYooper]

https://twitter.com/#!/evansilva/status/162594886451867648


Per @BobMcGinn, Jermichael Finley had 7 drops in 117 career targets (6%) entering 2011. Dropped 13 of 103 (13%) in '11. http://is.gd/hGgXRt

[swede]

Per @BobMcGinn, Jermichael Finley had 7 drops in 117 career targets (6%) entering 2011. Dropped 13 of 103 (13%) in '11. http://is.gd/hGgXRt

I ask this seriously. If those numbers are good, and I have no evidence they are not, why does it seem that he dropped 30% of the passes that came his way? I can't believe I was all upset at the guy for missing one out of nine.

[hoosier]

Per @BobMcGinn, Jermichael Finley had 7 drops in 117 career targets (6%) entering 2011. Dropped 13 of 103 (13%) in '11.


I ask this seriously. If those numbers are good, and I have no evidence they are not, why does it seem that he dropped 30% of the passes that came his way? I can't believe I was all upset at the guy for missing one out of nine.

Return to remedial math! He dropped one out of eight this year. 13% drop rate is terrible, especially considering that he is supposed to have good hands. The pre-2011 are reasonably good, but that just makes Finley's 2011 even worse.

[smuggler]

Because sometimes he didn't catch passes that he could have and they didn't count them as a drop. Dropping one pass per game is outright bad.

[Patler]

http://www.espnmilwaukee.com/corp/page/01%2F18%2F12_Finley%27s_game_needs_detailing/402?feed=2

Good article by Jason Wilde on Finley.


An interesting analysis of a play for which many blamed Rodgers for throwing inaccurately or with too much velocity:


Facing third-and-5 from the Giants’ 39-yard line, quarterback Aaron Rodgers had Finley wide open on a short slant route, but Rodgers’ fastball was too far in front of Finley, who dove and got his right hand on the ball before it fell incomplete. The Packers went for it on fourth-and-5 on the next play, and Rodgers was sacked for a 6-yard loss. The Giants got the ball back and took a 23-13 lead on a Lawrence Tynes field goal after a 10-play drive that bled 5:06 off the clock.


Asked after the game what went wrong on the play, Rodgers replied: “I missed my spot maybe a little bit. But I’ll have to go back and look at the film and see what happened.”
On Tuesday, Rodgers still hadn’t broken down the film from the loss but explained the play on his weekly radio show on ESPN Milwaukee and ESPN Madison this way: “Just not executing. One of those things where, we like the play call. We had a combination Randall (Cobb) and Jermichael on one side, the other three guys running combination routes (on the other side). I kind of took my eyes to the left at first because I wanted to come back to the Jermichael/Cobb side, and when I came back we just weren’t able to connect. And then fourth down, (the Giants) had a defense that was really good for the play we had called and we got beat and nobody was open.”


It appeared as if Finley slowed down during his route, but Rodgers never mentioned that and Finley said after the game that he never slowed down.


“I was still running through the ball. It was one of those plays I couldn’t make. There was too much on it and it was out there a little,” Finley explained. “The fans think it was me, probably. It was just one of those things. If you’re looking on the outside, you probably think I dropped the ball.”

Actually, it turns out that Finley ran his route incorrectly – one of those details that McAdoo believes he can be better with.

According to McAdoo, Finley was supposed to run a 5-step slant route on the play. Instead, McAdoo said, Finley was “a little bit quick with it” and only ran it at three steps before his break.


“What happened is, he hit the hole and he got there a little bit quick. And that forced him to throttle down, as opposed to taking five (steps) and getting there in stride,” McAdoo explained. “And it kind of threw the timing between him and the quarterback off a little bit.
“One more step and it’s a completion and we’re looking at a different ballgame possibly.”


Asked Wednesday if that play was evidence of how much room Finley has to improve as a young player, McCarthy agreed, although he also absolved Finley by saying that other receivers run imprecise routes from time to time and the pass still gets completed. At the same time, McCarthy suggested that the route had more to do with the completion than the throw’s velocity or location.
I would feel better if Finley came out and said, "I screwed up the route." Instead, he tries to deflect blame. "too much on it" and it (the throw) was "out there a little" "If you're looking on the outside, you probably think I dropped the ball."

Finley is an interesting case. MM insists (and I have no reason to doubt it) that Finley works as hard as anyone and really wants to excel. On the other hand, we have seen him deflect blame and fail to accept responsibility on more than one occasion. He will really have arrived when he is willing to accept fault when the greatest share of blame is on someone else.

[Brandon494]

Hahahaha

[Patler]

https://twitter.com/#!/evansilva/status/162594886451867648 (https://twitter.com/#%21/evansilva/status/162594886451867648)


Per @BobMcGinn, Jermichael Finley had 7 drops in 117 career targets (6%) entering 2011. Dropped 13 of 103 (13%) in '11. http://is.gd/hGgXRt




In another article, McGinn said that in 2010 Finley had 0 drops in 25 targeted passes, so the 7 drops were in 92 targets, or 7.6%, before 2010.

Again the Finley dichotomy:

Is he a TE with good hands who had a bad year in 2011; or
Is he a TE with marginal hands who had a hot streak in 2010 ???

Which will he be in 2012 and after?

All this leads me to believe the more likely scenario is a franchise tag for Finley, to give him one more season to prove himself, unless he is willing to accept a reasonable contract heavy with incentives, or a relatively short contract like Jones (3 years).

[Patler]

Hahahaha

?????????????????????

[Cheesehead Craig]

To me it was simply a case of Finley believing he was going to sit in a pocket in the zone and Rodgers thinking he was going to keep running.

[George Cumby]

An interesting analysis of a play for which many blamed Rodgers for throwing inaccurately or with too much velocity:
I would feel better if Finley came out and said, "I screwed up the route." Instead, he tries to deflect blame. "too much on it" and it (the throw) was "out there a little" "If you're looking on the outside, you probably think I dropped the ball."

Finley is an interesting case. MM insists (and I have no reason to doubt it) that Finley works as hard as anyone and really wants to excel. On the other hand, we have seen him deflect blame and fail to accept responsibility on more than one occasion. He will really have arrived when he is willing to accept fault when the greatest share of blame is on someone else.

This is where I take issue with him, besides the drops, that is. All too often in the press it's not his fault. He hasn't full on thrown Rodgers under the bus like in his rookie year; he said something like he doesn't do back-shoulder throws or some nonsense, but he still doesn't accept accountability like a professional should. The excuse of young and immature is starting to wear thin. He needs to get it together this next season and perform. The potential is there to dominate if he screws his head on straight.

[HarveyWallbangers]

In another article, McGinn said that in 2010 Finley had 0 drops in 25 targeted passes, so the 7 drops were in 92 targets, or 7.6%, before 2010.

Again the Finley dichotomy:

Is he a TE with good hands who had a bad year in 2011; or
Is he a TE with marginal hands who had a hot streak in 2010 ???

Which will he be in 2012 and after?

All this leads me to believe the more likely scenario is a franchise tag for Finley, to give him one more season to prove himself, unless he is willing to accept a reasonable contract heavy with incentives, or a relatively short contract like Jones (3 years).

How many drops his rookie year and how many his second year?

[Patler]

How many drops his rookie year and how many his second year?

I have no clue. All I have are two stat comments from McGinn in recent articles:

7 in 117 before 2011.
0 in 25 in 2010.

Therefore, 7 in 92 before 2010.

[Pugger]

To me it was simply a case of Finley believing he was going to sit in a pocket in the zone and Rodgers thinking he was going to keep running.

And I'm sure this isn't the first time that has happened between Rodgers and one of his receivers. Finley dropped passes but it looks like every receiver goes thru times like this. Jones and Nelson had a bad case of the drops in 2010. If this continues in 2012 for Finley then we have a problem.

[mraynrand]

Geezus, Finley wasn't sitting down in a zone. He took three steps, whatever, and made his cut. He looked like he was running pretty fast to me - not "throttling down." Rodgers wasn't throwing with a blindfold on - he still could have thrown a better ball, even if Finley wasn't running the perfect pattern. Pass and catch, it's not that hard.

Still, maybe I'm wrong. I'll run some partial differential equations on the velocity and the rotational angular momentum of Finley's cut and on the football and get back to you.

[swede]

Geezus, Finley wasn't sitting down in a zone. He took three steps, whatever, and made his cut. He looked like he was running pretty fast to me - not "throttling down." Rodgers wasn't throwing with a blindfold on - he still could have thrown a better ball, even if Finley wasn't running the perfect pattern. Pass and catch, it's not that hard.

Still, maybe I'm wrong. I'll run some partial differential equations on the velocity and the rotational angular momentum of Finley's cut and on the football and get back to you.

I feel that way too. Is Rodgers such a robot he can't recalculate a receiver bumped slightly off a route or making a two-step error? This wasn't a back shoulder throw, it was a slant.

Btw, don't do the math in your head or Hoosier will mock you. This site demands slide rule accuracy, and that's okay.
Peer pressure makes us grate.

[Brandon494]

Geezus, Finley wasn't sitting down in a zone. He took three steps, whatever, and made his cut. He looked like he was running pretty fast to me - not "throttling down." Rodgers wasn't throwing with a blindfold on - he still could have thrown a better ball, even if Finley wasn't running the perfect pattern. Pass and catch, it's not that hard.

Exactly! Some people just can't help but complain about Finley. Even what Finley said about the play wasnt a big deal but then people want to take shots at him because he didn't take blame for running the wrong route? It wasnt a timing route and he was wide open when Rodgers released the ball. Rodgers wasn't on that game and plain overthrew Finley.

[smuggler]

Or maybe they were both at fault.

[Smeefers]

So when are the Finely and Hawk comparisons going to start popping up?

[Brandon494]

Or maybe they were both at fault.

Oh for sure, Id say 70% Rodgers and 30% Finley.

[denverYooper]

And I'm sure this isn't the first time that has happened between Rodgers and one of his receivers. Finley dropped passes but it looks like every receiver goes thru times like this. Jones and Nelson had a bad case of the drops in 2010. If this continues in 2012 for Finley then we have a problem.


So when are the Finely and Hawk comparisons going to start popping up?

Dunno... who was available when we drafted Fin?

[HarveyWallbangers]

I have no clue. All I have are two stat comments from McGinn in recent articles:

7 in 117 before 2011.
0 in 25 in 2010.

Therefore, 7 in 92 before 2010.

I'm wondering because I remember him struggling as a rookie. He didn't have many balls thrown his way, but I remember him dropping a lot of them that he did. If he had 3 drops in 12 targets, for example, then his 2009 season was better than you are giving him credit for. I tend to think of him as a guy who was overwhelmed as a rookie, didn't have a lot of drops in 2009 and 2010, but had a miserable year for drops in 2011. Still doesn't take away from the fact that he's important to the offense because he provides mismatches.

Similar to Greg Jennings vs. Jordy Nelson. Jordy could have better stats, but Jennings is the better player. Until defenses roll their coverages away from Jennings and towards Nelson, I'm going to think of Jennings as the most important WR in our system.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Or maybe they were both at fault.

Bingo!

[Patler]

Exactly! Some people just can't help but complain about Finley. Even what Finley said about the play wasnt a big deal but then people want to take shots at him because he didn't take blame for running the wrong route? It wasnt a timing route and he was wide open when Rodgers released the ball. Rodgers wasn't on that game and plain overthrew Finley.

Perhaps you should explain that to his position coach and head coach, who clearly seemed to lay the biggest share of blame on the route he ran and not on the throw.

[pbmax]

I feel that way too. Is Rodgers such a robot he can't recalculate a receiver bumped slightly off a route or making a two-step error? This wasn't a back shoulder throw, it was a slant...


This is the downside of the adjustments QBs and receivers make that are not in the playbook, or are options depending on the coverage/defense. It works great when both are on the same page (see back shoulder throws) but when they are off, it makes a simple play look bad. Even McCarthy said Finley wasn't the first receiver to run 3 steps and cut on that route, the unspoken intention of which is to probably to the open zone faster and more directly. And he admitted that adjustment has worked for others before. Not saying that Finley was correct, but clearly something about that route begs it to be cut short.

The culprit in this case, I would be willing to bet, is Rodgers internal clock. While the Packers did a good job on the initial Giants pass rush, Rodgers did not have a clean pocket for long in that game and he took to bailing quicker than normal. And he bailed not just when there were free rushers, but when lineman got close even with blockers around.

If his head had given him permission to wait for a half second, he would have thrown a different ball. As it was, they should have, as a group, dumped the mini adjustments and just run the play cold. I think that Finley has more trouble with those in route adjustments (and is less predictable) and that is a large reason why half of the passes to Finley looked either off target or got to him while he was in an awkward position.

[Upnorth]

Looking at only the giants game Arod shares some of the blame for some of the drops. However most drops in most of the games were on Finley predominantly.

Sorry that reads wrong. I ment the passers targeted at Finley, not all drops.

[Patler]

I'm wondering because I remember him struggling as a rookie. He didn't have many balls thrown his way, but I remember him dropping a lot of them that he did. If he had 3 drops in 12 targets, for example, then his 2009 season was better than you are giving him credit for. I tend to think of him as a guy who was overwhelmed as a rookie, didn't have a lot of drops in 2009 and 2010, but had a miserable year for drops in 2011. Still doesn't take away from the fact that he's important to the offense because he provides mismatches.

I said nothing about 2009, because I have no stats for 2009.
In fact, I posed the two possible scenarios that it could be, because I simply do not know:


Again the Finley dichotomy:

Is he a TE with good hands who had a bad year in 2011; or
Is he a TE with marginal hands who had a hot streak in 2010 ???

Which will he be in 2012 and after?


I really do not know what to think about Finley anymore. I criticized him as a rookie for not acting like a professional. But in 2009 and while he played in 2010 I praised him regularly for having changed more over one off season (after 2008 season) both as a player and as an adult than any player I could remember. I frequently said I had the utmost respect for what he had done. Now this season I see less of the professional approach and more the immature attitude. Could be he is a person who does not react well during personal adversity.

I really hope they tag Finley, or work out a short term agreement like they did with Jones. Pay Finley well, but without a long term commitment and the higher guarantee that would likely have to go with it. Give him a chance to prove the direction he will go, but don't contract with him as if he has already proven it, because he hasn't. He has shown enough to wet our appetites about the possibilities, but not enough to ensure that it will be there regularly.

[Brandon494]

Perhaps you should explain that to his position coach and head coach, who clearly seemed to lay the biggest share of blame on the route he ran and not on the throw.

Maybe in your eyes and the writer but I don't remember seeing any quote stating that.

Perhaps you should explain to me how breaking out of his slant route in 3 steps instead of 5 caused Rodgers to overthrow a wide open Finley? The only thing Finley did was get open 2 steps quicker. Bottom line Rodgers should have made the throw and 9 times out of 10 does make it.

[Brandon494]

Also if you find me one post where you praise Finley and not some backed handed compliment I'll promise to never get on your case about him again. At least I can admit I don't like AJ Hawk.

[mraynrand]

Btw, don't do the math in your head or Hoosier will mock you. This site demands slide rule accuracy, and that's okay.
Peer pressure makes us grate.


Slide rule? Loser!

http://sliderule.mraiow.com/w/images/thumb/9/9b/Texas_Instruments_TI-89_Titanium_obverse.jpg/180px-Texas_Instruments_TI-89_Titanium_obverse.jpg

[mraynrand]

This is the downside of the adjustments QBs and receivers make that are not in the playbook, or are options depending on the coverage/defense. It works great when both are on the same page (see back shoulder throws) but when they are off, it makes a simple play look bad. Even McCarthy said Finley wasn't the first receiver to run 3 steps and cut on that route, the unspoken intention of which is to probably to the open zone faster and more directly. And he admitted that adjustment has worked for others before. Not saying that Finley was correct, but clearly something about that route begs it to be cut short.

The culprit in this case, I would be willing to bet, is Rodgers internal clock. While the Packers did a good job on the initial Giants pass rush, Rodgers did not have a clean pocket for long in that game and he took to bailing quicker than normal. And he bailed not just when there were free rushers, but when lineman got close even with blockers around.

If his head had given him permission to wait for a half second, he would have thrown a different ball. As it was, they should have, as a group, dumped the mini adjustments and just run the play cold. I think that Finley has more trouble with those in route adjustments (and is less predictable) and that is a large reason why half of the passes to Finley looked either off target or got to him while he was in an awkward position.

And yet, on the play where the ball was knocked out on what should have been an easy TD to Jennings, Rodgers should have trusted Jennings to get open against the single coverage and held the ball a split second too long. You listen to his long-winded explanation of it and you can kinda tell he's rationalizing. I don't lump all the blame on Rodgers - and not on Finley either - or Jennings. Just on some very key plays, that sync they had in last year's run was just a little off, and it was enough to ruin everything.

[KYPack]

Maybe in your eyes and the writer but I don't remember seeing any quote stating that.

Perhaps you should explain to me how breaking out of his slant route in 3 steps instead of 5 caused Rodgers to overthrow a wide open Finley? The only thing Finley did was get open 2 steps quicker. Bottom line Rodgers should have made the throw and 9 times out of 10 does make it.

Listen to Uncle Patler, Brandon.

This is an example of one of Finely greatest sins. He's a sloppy route runner. He has a tendency to not be precise in his pattern. The most important part of a pass route ain't getting open in a spot. It's the rhythmn of the route. Especially in the Packer O, you must run your route precisely. You should come open at just the proper time, so ARod can put the ball in the spot with flawless timing. JF will run a sloppy route bc in he's in hurry to get his hands on the ball. He's still learning his role in the big picture. it will help him in the long run. When he learns how to run the slant right, it will set him up for the sluggo. Now he doesn't get sluggo's because the DBacks don't respect his slants. The kid is so talanted, he gets away with a ton of mistakes, becuase of his brilliant ability.

All that shit said, he will be back. The franchise number for TE's will be about 5.5 million per year. This kid is still only 24. the team will try like hell to sign him to a long term deal, but at the minimum they will franchise him.

[mraynrand]

All that may be true, KY, but Rodgers still coulda put the ball on him.

[Brandon494]

I understand how important route running is but on that play he was WIDE OPEN! Finley breaking out of his route 2 steps quicker had nothing to do with Rodgers trying to throw a bullet to a wide open reiever and over throwing him.

[Patler]

Maybe in your eyes and the writer but I don't remember seeing any quote stating that.

Perhaps you should explain to me how breaking out of his slant route in 3 steps instead of 5 caused Rodgers to overthrow a wide open Finley? The only thing Finley did was get open 2 steps quicker. Bottom line Rodgers should have made the throw and 9 times out of 10 does make it.

McAdoo quote from print:
“What happened is, he hit the hole and he got there a little bit quick. And that forced him to throttle down, as opposed to taking five (steps) and getting there in stride,” McAdoo explained. “And it kind of threw the timing between him and the quarterback off a little bit.
“One more step and it’s a completion and we’re looking at a different ballgame possibly.”

McCarthy quote from video of press conference:
"You want him to run 5, so the quarterback can clearly look off, then establish where to throw the ball to, like Aaron was doing on that play."


Why does 3 steps instead of 5 cause an incompletion? Tonight I will look again at the game. My recollection is that Rodgers was releasing the ball before Finley made his break, or at least as Finley started to break, before he expected Finley to make his break. He was throwing to where he expected Finley would be after completing a five step route. Finley came up two strides short of where he should have been. Rarely does a QB have the luxury of throwing to where a receiver is. He throws to where he expects the player to be when the ball gets there, based on the route he expects the receiver to run.

[mraynrand]

I still don't get it. If Finley runs 3 steps throttled down compared to 5 steps at the right speed, the play should be about the same.

I'm guessing the coaches are saying that Finley broke too soon, throttled down, and Rodgers threw as though Finley were running full speed after what should have been a 5 step pattern and break, which is what he expected. But, Rodgers isn't throwing blind. he's still looking at the receiver - and he did look at Finley on that play, albeit briefly, after coming back to the right. He can still put the ball on Finley, even if he's running a different speed and/or depth.

I'm not going to put a percent fault breakdown on it, but given how football is played there's no way I'm pinning the majority of the blame on Finley.

[Patler]

I understand how important route running is but on that play he was WIDE OPEN! Finley breaking out of his route 2 steps quicker had nothing to do with Rodgers trying to throw a bullet to a wide open reiever and over throwing him.

Actually, having just listened to McCarthy and thinking about it a little more, with what you remember of Finley being wide open at the time of the throw (I remember it a bit differently, but I will accept yours for now) what probably happened was this:

Rodgers was looking the other direction intentionally to influence coverage, both he and MM stated such.
He came back to Finley, expecting to see Finley still in his route, but instead may have seen him done or just completing it.
Realizing Finley was a lot early, Rodgers hurried his release and tried to rifle the ball to get it there before the DB recovered.

It jives with all of the comments:
McAdoo saying the timing was off.
McAdoo saying that just one more step would have lead to a completion (More time, different location).
MM saying you need 5 steps to give QB enough time to look off and then come back with time to establish his target and throw.
AR saying he missed his target a little.

[Smidgeon]

I feel that way too. Is Rodgers such a robot he can't recalculate a receiver bumped slightly off a route or making a two-step error? This wasn't a back shoulder throw, it was a slant.

Btw, don't do the math in your head or Hoosier will mock you. This site demands slide rule accuracy, and that's okay.
Peer pressure makes us grate.

I don't have the play available to review. Did Rodgers throw the ball before Finley's break or after?

[sharpe1027]

It seems to me that: In the first instance his cut occurs at 3 yards and he basically stops running to sit in a pocket of the defense. In the second instance, his cut occurs 2 yards later (difference in both timing and location) and he is running at full speed when the pass is thrown. The difference is 2 yards, timing and being stopped vs. running at full speed. I'm not saying that Rodgers couldn't have adjusted for the shorter route, but it certainly seems like a pretty big difference in where the pass needs to be thrown.

I'd like to see it again to get a better idea of the timing.

[mraynrand]

I don't have the play available to review. Did Rodgers throw the ball before Finley's break or after?

I'm pretty sure it was after. If you think about it, it had to be. If he only ran three steps and cut, he wold be into his cut well before Rodgers was going to come back to him. Therefore, the throttle-down, therefore, the missed timing on the throw, assuming Rodgers robotically threw it to a spot.

[swede]

Slide rule? Loser!

http://sliderule.mraiow.com/w/images/thumb/9/9b/Texas_Instruments_TI-89_Titanium_obverse.jpg/180px-Texas_Instruments_TI-89_Titanium_obverse.jpg

Get real! When I was in high school a rig like that cost 300 bucks. I can't imagine how much they are now.!

[sharpe1027]

If Rodgers was looking away and then came back and threw immediately, I don't think it is unreasonable to assume that he would throw the pass expecting Finley to be running a slant per the play call rather than stopping. How can we expect Rodgers to process, in a split second, the fact that Finley is not only through his cut 2 yards early, but also stopping his route because of it? I readily admit that it still was not the best throw, but pretending that running a 3 yard route instead of a 5 yard route doesn't make any difference seems unrealistic to me.

[denverYooper]

This is the downside of the adjustments QBs and receivers make that are not in the playbook, or are options depending on the coverage/defense. It works great when both are on the same page (see back shoulder throws) but when they are off, it makes a simple play look bad. Even McCarthy said Finley wasn't the first receiver to run 3 steps and cut on that route, the unspoken intention of which is to probably to the open zone faster and more directly. And he admitted that adjustment has worked for others before. Not saying that Finley was correct, but clearly something about that route begs it to be cut short.

The culprit in this case, I would be willing to bet, is Rodgers internal clock. While the Packers did a good job on the initial Giants pass rush, Rodgers did not have a clean pocket for long in that game and he took to bailing quicker than normal. And he bailed not just when there were free rushers, but when lineman got close even with blockers around.

If his head had given him permission to wait for a half second, he would have thrown a different ball. As it was, they should have, as a group, dumped the mini adjustments and just run the play cold. I think that Finley has more trouble with those in route adjustments (and is less predictable) and that is a large reason why half of the passes to Finley looked either off target or got to him while he was in an awkward position.

This brings up another possible reason for Finley's problems this year: he's been expected to do a lot more. I remember an article from earlier in the year where M3 stated that Finley had to know basically all of the WR and TE routes + adjustments. I think that some of that might be the impetus behind Baratz trying to push for the WR tag on Fin--because his client had to know all of the WR positions.

It also makes sense that M3 would defend Jermichael as he has because he knows this and he figures that once the playbook has sunk in enough Finley will be a monster. One thing he always emphasizes is that Finley is still very young so I think they will give Finley a good year or three to mature and grow within their system.

As far as the play being discussed, the Pack dumping their route adjustments might very well have brought a level of comfort back in a stressful situation, but I've never noticed McCarthy make such an in-game adjustment. For the most part it seems that they will run their offense in all of its formational glory into the ground, if need be, with the expectation that it will pay off in the long run. This is likely a discussion that will be had in the offseason but there is a good chance that the right "adjustment" for Finley to make there might have been none at all and that is what McAdoo was getting at.

[swede]

The culprit in this case, I would be willing to bet, is Rodgers internal clock. While the Packers did a good job on the initial Giants pass rush, Rodgers did not have a clean pocket for long in that game and he took to bailing quicker than normal. And he bailed not just when there were free rushers, but when lineman got close even with blockers around.


Good post. I'm buying that. I don't understand it as well as you do but I am buying it.

Rodgers, as good as he was that day, was rattled by the pressure and lack of mojo with his receivers. The only thing left to do is throw earlier and harder.

[smuggler]

Get real! When I was in high school a rig like that cost 300 bucks. I can't imagine how much they are now.!

Much less, as with many technologies, the prices trend down.

[MJZiggy]

Get real! When I was in high school a rig like that cost 300 bucks. I can't imagine how much they are now.!

$99.

[Lurker64]

$99.

And that's honestly highway robbery, considering the price of other electronics made from similar parts.

But the graphing calculator people have a good scam going, in that they're in bed with the textbook manufacturers, who write their high school math texts to require graphing calculators (generally a specific brand.) So they kind of have the market cornered.

Personally I believe, from a mathematics pedagogy perspective, the role of technology is to trick students into having to tackle more difficult ideas because they can dispense with the BS. The way graphing calculators are used in classrooms is kind of the opposite of that, since nobody who teaches math these days would actually use one outside of the classroom in a class for which it is required, so "how the heck does the calculator work" gets way too much time devoted to it.

[MJZiggy]

And that's honestly highway robbery, considering the price of other electronics made from similar parts.

But the graphing calculator people have a good scam going, in that they're in bed with the textbook manufacturers, who write their high school math texts to require graphing calculators (generally a specific brand.) So they kind of have the market cornered.

Personally I believe, from a mathematics pedagogy perspective, the role of technology is to trick students into having to tackle more difficult ideas because they can dispense with the BS. The way graphing calculators are used in classrooms is kind of the opposite of that, since nobody who teaches math these days would actually use one outside of the classroom in a class for which it is required, so "how the heck does the calculator work" gets way too much time devoted to it.

Actually, the worst part is that there are programs you can download for free that do the same thing...I was tempted to claim financial hardship so I wouldn't have to actually buy one. I AM a single parent you know.

[Lurker64]

Actually, the worst part is that there are programs you can download for free that do the same thing...I was tempted to claim financial hardship so I wouldn't have to actually buy one. I AM a single parent you know.

I wonder if there's like an iOS application that takes the place of a graphing calculator, since if I had kids I would probably rather give them an iPod Touch with the graphing calculator app, than a $100 unitasker like a TI Graphing Calculator... at least the iPod is fun when you're not in math class.

Actually, if I had kids and they were taking a math class that required a graphing calculator, I'd probably just go in and browbeat the poor teacher until he or she relents. Failing that, we would learn, on our own, how to do everything with paper and your brain.

[smuggler]

Oh yeah, it's a complete scam. It's worth about $15

[mraynrand]

nobody who teaches math these days would actually use one outside of the classroom in a class for which it is required

Damn staight. I woldn't use anything in any class it's required for outside the class. In a class.

[Upnorth]

Can you use one of those fancy calculators to predict Finley's catch rate? That would really help in contract negotiations.

[woodbuck27]

Oh yeah, it's a complete scam. It's worth about $15


Actual fact..I'm a former math techer...It's worthless or worth nothing. $ZERO$ comes to mind.

[woodbuck27]

Maybe in your eyes and the writer but I don't remember seeing any quote stating that.

Perhaps you should explain to me how breaking out of his slant route in 3 steps instead of 5 caused Rodgers to overthrow a wide open Finley? The only thing Finley did was get open 2 steps quicker. Bottom line Rodgers should have made the throw and 9 times out of 10 does make it.


That throw by Aaron Rodgers was wide right and not easy to snatch by J. Finley.He had to lung for it as I recall. AR made a poor throw. AR deserves the Lions share of the blame on that missed opportunity.

Maybe.... just maybe.... AR was too psyched too pumped all game and certainly that out of the gate. See missed pass on the right to Greg Jennings and he was so wide open. That was unfortunate. That was a BIG surprize too. Maybe?... that set up a state of too much emergency and thus we see all kinds of errors?

In hockey you get a Coach's time out. He calls the players to the bench and settles them down with a short spech. That has to wait till the half in the NFL. maybe te rules should allow a HC Time OUt ...one per half?

[Tarlam!]

I'm a former math techer

Wow. That explains a lot to me. I say that with utter respect.

[mraynrand]

Actual fact..I'm a former math techer...It's worthless or worth nothing. $ZERO$ comes to mind.

SC must not be awake yet, so let me take on this target-rich post first.

1) I agree with you!
2) Good thing you weren't in the English department!
3) When I read your posts, zero comes to my mind too.

Scott, take it away....

[Tarlam!]

so let me take on this target-rich post first.

You didn't. I did. Buck and I (and SC if I may use his name) go way back as poster combatants. We all coulda taken a shot about his grammar, but we're on a football forum. We could all take a shot at some of your posts from last night, which were also enlightening. I wonder if you'll be as lucid as 'buck when you're 70.

As I said, it's a football forum. I always admired you, Rand, but you've changed.

[pbmax]

Maybe in your eyes and the writer but I don't remember seeing any quote stating that.

Perhaps you should explain to me how breaking out of his slant route in 3 steps instead of 5 caused Rodgers to overthrow a wide open Finley? The only thing Finley did was get open 2 steps quicker. Bottom line Rodgers should have made the throw and 9 times out of 10 does make it.

Because in the NFL, with split second decisions to make and safeties to look off, you cannot take the time to locate an objectively open receiver, target him (adjust feet, measure his movement relative to you) and throw. When you take that kind of time, you look exactly like Tim Tebow. Tebow is fantastic when he has an open pocket, can spot someone open, track him for a step or two while resetting his feet, and then throw. You will also only complete 50% of your passes because not many are that open and DBs will follow you to the ball.

In other words you could call this telegraphing the pass. The shame of it is that the route broke so wide open that it wouldn't of mattered if Rodgers did telegraph it. But because he was not where he was supposed to be when he was supposed to be, he was not where Rodgers believed he would be.

It might have been different had Finley been on a very short route, where Rodgers could just flick him the ball as in a checkdown.

[pbmax]

Listen to Uncle Patler, Brandon.

This is an example of one of Finely greatest sins. He's a sloppy route runner. He has a tendency to not be precise in his pattern. The most important part of a pass route ain't getting open in a spot. It's the rhythmn of the route. Especially in the Packer O, you must run your route precisely. You should come open at just the proper time, so ARod can put the ball in the spot with flawless timing. JF will run a sloppy route bc in he's in hurry to get his hands on the ball. He's still learning his role in the big picture. it will help him in the long run. When he learns how to run the slant right, it will set him up for the sluggo. Now he doesn't get sluggo's because the DBacks don't respect his slants. The kid is so talanted, he gets away with a ton of mistakes, becuase of his brilliant ability.

All that shit said, he will be back. The franchise number for TE's will be about 5.5 million per year. This kid is still only 24. the team will try like hell to sign him to a long term deal, but at the minimum they will franchise him.


All that may be true, KY, but Rodgers still coulda put the ball on him.


I understand how important route running is but on that play he was WIDE OPEN! Finley breaking out of his route 2 steps quicker had nothing to do with Rodgers trying to throw a bullet to a wide open reiever and over throwing him.

Of course it COULD be completed. But if Rodgers did not feel like he had time to locate a receiver on an adjusted route and then throw, he isn't going to take the time. Rodgers was bothered enough in the pocket that he wanted to throw on rhythm to his natural progressions or bail.

Had the protection been holding up longer, then I suspect the throw is adjusted and its complete.

That is why receivers have to know what the QB is going through. You cannot do a jazz improvisation with your route if the QB is getting knocked around in the pocket. You need to be where you need to be exactly when you are supposed to be there.

[pbmax]

McAdoo quote from print:
“What happened is, he hit the hole and he got there a little bit quick. And that forced him to throttle down, as opposed to taking five (steps) and getting there in stride,” McAdoo explained. “And it kind of threw the timing between him and the quarterback off a little bit.
“One more step and it’s a completion and we’re looking at a different ballgame possibly.”

McCarthy quote from video of press conference:
"You want him to run 5, so the quarterback can clearly look off, then establish where to throw the ball to, like Aaron was doing on that play."


Why does 3 steps instead of 5 cause an incompletion? Tonight I will look again at the game. My recollection is that Rodgers was releasing the ball before Finley made his break, or at least as Finley started to break, before he expected Finley to make his break. He was throwing to where he expected Finley would be after completing a five step route. Finley came up two strides short of where he should have been. Rarely does a QB have the luxury of throwing to where a receiver is. He throws to where he expects the player to be when the ball gets there, based on the route he expects the receiver to run.


I still don't get it. If Finley runs 3 steps throttled down compared to 5 steps at the right speed, the play should be about the same.

I'm guessing the coaches are saying that Finley broke too soon, throttled down, and Rodgers threw as though Finley were running full speed after what should have been a 5 step pattern and break, which is what he expected. But, Rodgers isn't throwing blind. he's still looking at the receiver - and he did look at Finley on that play, albeit briefly, after coming back to the right. He can still put the ball on Finley, even if he's running a different speed and/or depth.

I'm not going to put a percent fault breakdown on it, but given how football is played there's no way I'm pinning the majority of the blame on Finley.

There is another component as well which both the QB and coach have talked about this year. Rodgers is tasked to look left to draw coverage attention away. He also needs a window to throw through. Finley's depth on the route (3 or 5 steps) changes where he appears in Rodgers field of vision and it might change which O line gap he peers through to find the TE. By being in one place versus the other, it adds time to finding him and might force a change to his footwork.

Either task could be completed if Rodgers isn't feeling hurried, but I definitely feel he was in this game.

Finley being unpredictable makes this worse.

Objectively, doing what McAdoo describes (sitting in an open zone) isn't a bad move. But if the QB expects something else, it was a good decision made at the wrong time.

[mraynrand]

Objectively, doing what McAdoo describes (sitting in an open zone) isn't a bad move. But if the QB expects something else, it was a good decision made at the wrong time.

I agree with most of what you wrote. But about this 'sitting in a zone' that's not what happened is it? Finley supposedly broke of a five step to a three step and 'throttled down' 1) a shorter pattern at a slower speed should put him approximately in the right spot, with the throw perhaps too fast or too high, no? But not off target. 2) I don't recall - did Finley actually stop in his pattern? If he did, everything I wrote goes out the window and Finley is completely to blame.

[Brandon494]

Because in the NFL, with split second decisions to make and safeties to look off, you cannot take the time to locate an objectively open receiver, target him (adjust feet, measure his movement relative to you) and throw. When you take that kind of time, you look exactly like Tim Tebow. Tebow is fantastic when he has an open pocket, can spot someone open, track him for a step or two while resetting his feet, and then throw. You will also only complete 50% of your passes because not many are that open and DBs will follow you to the ball.

In other words you could call this telegraphing the pass. The shame of it is that the route broke so wide open that it wouldn't of mattered if Rodgers did telegraph it. But because he was not where he was supposed to be when he was supposed to be, he was not where Rodgers believed he would be.

It might have been different had Finley been on a very short route, where Rodgers could just flick him the ball as in a checkdown.

Rodgers had not played for 21 days and was not sharp that game even missing Jennings early in the 1st quarter, Finley might have broke the route but Rodgers was not pressured on the play and should have made the throw.

[Brandon494]

but who knows if Finley would have even caught it anyway.

[Brandon494]

"I felt like we had a pretty good rhythm," Rodgers said. "We moved the ball pretty effectively. We just had some drops and some uncharacteristic turnovers. … We just had some chances and didn't make the most of them."

None was more critical than Rodgers' misfire to Finley on third-and-five from the Giants' 39-yard line in the third quarter. With the Packers trailing 20-13, Finley ran a slant route and was wide open for a first down at about the 25-yard line. Rodgers threw him a fastball that sailed wide and off Finley's fingertips. Rodgers was sacked on fourth down, and the Packers never had an opportunity to tie the game again.

"I missed my spot a little bit," Rodgers said. Finley added: "It was out in front of me. I put one hand out. I tried to get it. I have to catch that ball …. It was one of those plays I couldn't make."

[ThunderDan]

In hockey you get a Coach's time out. He calls the players to the bench and settles them down with a short spech. That has to wait till the half in the NFL. maybe te rules should allow a HC Time OUt ...one per half?

The rules allow 3 time outs per half already. :lol:

[pbmax]

I agree with most of what you wrote. But about this 'sitting in a zone' that's not what happened is it? Finley supposedly broke of a five step to a three step and 'throttled down' 1) a shorter pattern at a slower speed should put him approximately in the right spot, with the throw perhaps too fast or too high, no? But not off target. 2) I don't recall - did Finley actually stop in his pattern? If he did, everything I wrote goes out the window and Finley is completely to blame.

You could be right, though shorter and slower could mean he is too close to the LOS or not inside enough depending on his footwork, speed, etc. If he was careful, he might still be in the same QB sight line.

But I took the mention of "came into the open" comment by McAdoo to mean he found the hole in the defense faster than the route would have anticipated. He turns and hesitates, which I take to mean if he kept running at full speed, he would be well past the spot Rodgers was looking for him (as he is slanting to his left, if he turns early and keep running, he is covering more ground laterally than Rodgers would expect) and he would run the risk of running past the open spot in the coverage.

So he throttles down to not further deviate from the route and to preserve his open spot. At a slower speed and a different depth, Rodgers glances back to his right and sees Finley roughly where he expects and lets it fly, anticipating Finley to be moving at a normal rate of speed from the spot he would normally be at it. But the throw is not correct for his actual position and speed. Finley cannot correct fast enough.

Its anyone's guess why he heaved the ball pretty fast.

But as I said, Finley made it incumbent on the QB to adjust to him. And the QB had played the entire game as though he did not have time to do this. And with Finley being mainly worried about what Finley does, it would make sense that he has trouble seeing that the QB does not always have time to adjust to receiver, even if he is wide open.

[pbmax]

Rodgers had not played for 21 days and was not sharp that game even missing Jennings early in the 1st quarter, Finley might have broke the route but Rodgers was not pressured on the play and should have made the throw.

It was not his most accurate game. But that route to Jennings was a perfect example of how they need to be on the same page, regardless of how open they are. Jennings sat down in another hole in the coverage and Rodgers threw it like he was going to break the route back to the endzone like it was a post-corner. Since they did not agree on where to be, pass incomplete.

Who is at fault? Hard to say, but on that one I think both adjusted from the initial route and each made a different adjustment. The pocket he was throwing from was endangered enough that I would prefer the QB to get the ball out on time and in rhythm rather than hesitate and adjust.

When the game is going like this, you need to cut out the improvisations and play it straight. Then step by step you can put the on the fly adjustments back in.

[pbmax]

"I felt like we had a pretty good rhythm," Rodgers said. "We moved the ball pretty effectively. We just had some drops and some uncharacteristic turnovers. … We just had some chances and didn't make the most of them."

None was more critical than Rodgers' misfire to Finley on third-and-five from the Giants' 39-yard line in the third quarter. With the Packers trailing 20-13, Finley ran a slant route and was wide open for a first down at about the 25-yard line. Rodgers threw him a fastball that sailed wide and off Finley's fingertips. Rodgers was sacked on fourth down, and the Packers never had an opportunity to tie the game again.

"I missed my spot a little bit," Rodgers said. Finley added: "It was out in front of me. I put one hand out. I tried to get it. I have to catch that ball …. It was one of those plays I couldn't make."

Neither Rodgers not Finley are telling the whole story there, are they? In film room, does Finley get by with "it was a play I couldn't make"?

The question is when this stuff happens, what do you do? The oline is in a fitful state because of shuffling starters (swapping Clifton and Newhouse probably wasn't helping because each guy gets beat in different ways). Rodgers has some rust and is slightly off target due to tight and unclean pockets. Receivers are getting jammed good on the line.

You can yell at the QB to be more accurate. I put the odds of this working at near zero, unless you want Tebow back there focusing on one receiver and tracking him until the delivery will be perfect. This would look like Rodgers early in 09 or maybe 08.

Or you can tell the receivers to dump all in route adjustments that are not called by the QB. So that even in a murky and collapsing pocket, the receiver is where the QB expects him to be. Because the one thing the QB should be able to control are his feet and with that, his clock.

[Lurker64]

Actual fact..I'm a former math techer...It's worthless or worth nothing. $ZERO$ comes to mind.

Well, graphing calculators I totally agree with you are more or less worthless for anything beyond "automating the plotting of functions, for whatever reason" (though Microsoft Excel does a darn good job too.) But technology in the classroom can actually benefit mathematical education greatly. I taught multivariable calc for engineers when in grad school, and the curriculum used computers extensively since it allowed you to skip all of the tedious techniques of integration stuff (since engineers can just safely feed that stuff to their computer algebra program of choice) and instead we devoted roughly half the semester to vector calculus (div, grad, curl, that sort of thing) which was both more interesting for the student as well as being conceptually much tougher stuff.

I just don't think you can do anything useful in the classroom with a TI-89. Mathematica is an entirely different story.