Giants Review: Start With Rodgers

[pbmax]

http://www.packersnews.com/article/20121126/PKR07/121126059/Baranczyk-Christl-column-Linemen-aren-t-finishing-blocks?odyssey=tab%7Ctopnews%7Ctext%7CFRONTPAGE&nclick_check=1

Baranczyk and Christl take aim at the O line first, then Rodgers. Not necessarily in order of worst job, but its some of the more pointed criticism of Rodgers in a while. Also makes a case for lang to go back to Guard though they don't discuss Barclay.

[Patler]

I don't disagree with the gist of their article, but they always present their arguments in such a "the sky is falling" manner that it really turns me off. Their descriptions of individuals, both players and coaches are generally demeaning, which I think is unnecessary. If you can sift through their pettiness, they sometimes make good points, but I find their presentation to be borderline unprofessional, but unfortunately quite common today.

[Patler]

It also intrigues me how their evaluations of those on IR, out for the game, or retired become so glowing compared to the poor slobs trying to fill in for them. When those same now unavailable players were the ones on the field, they never found as many good things to say about them.

Their approach never changes, and for that reason I find their articles uninteresting. I feel like I know what they will write before the article appears.

[Zool]

It also intrigues me how their evaluations of those on IR, out for the game, or retired become so glowing compared to the poor slobs trying to fill in for them. When those some now unavailable players were the ones on the field, they never found as many good things to say about them.

Their approach never changes, and for that reason I find their articles uninteresting. I feel like I know what they will write before the article appears.

"The average radio listener listens for eighteen minutes. The average Howard Stern fan listens for - are you ready for this? - an hour and twenty minutes"

"The average Stern hater listens for two and a half hours a day."

That unfortunately is the prevailing mentality of people anymore. Most of the media panders to this audience to increase revenue.

[LegandofthePack15]

"At times against teams that have been able to apply pressure in front of their two deep zones, Rodgers has made bad reads, pulled the ball down prematurely, gotten antsy with his feet and dumped off balls on third down that had little chance of picking up a first down."

Agree with this statement. Rodgers deserves all the criticisms he gets. The guy played one great, MVP-ish game this year - the 6 tds game VS Houston. The rest, Rodgers was either average or below average.

[rbaloha1]

AR sometimes likes the make the big plays too often by holding the ball too long.

The return of Jennings helps the offense tremendously.

[Patler]

[I]The rest, Rodgers was either average or below average.

Do you mean average for him, or average for starters in the league?

Was it the Detroit game (my old mind fails me :) ) in which none of us felt he played particularly well? OK, but not exceptional. Yet MM said that it may have been one of Rodgers best games, in view of the circumstances he was put in and how he responded to it.

Today McGinn states:


He has made it clear how much he abhors interceptions and is striving to keep away from a double-digit total for the season. Rodgers said he didn't throw the Hail Mary at the end of the first half partially because he might have taken a big hit from Mathias Kiwanuka when he reared up to unleash. Offensive coordinator Tom Clements approved of his decision. But it's also likely that Rodgers doesn't want to give away a cheap pick, either.


"But it's also likely....." Likely? Based on what? Rodgers seems to dislike interceptions, but so does MM, and more importantly they have impressed on him over and over that a single play is not worth it if he puts himself at significant risk to make it. If he had thrown the ball for an incompletion or interception, and been leveled by Kiwanuka in the process sustaining a concussion or other injury knocking him out of the game, games or season; McGinn and all the others would complain about his decision making putting himself at significant risk for a play with very limited chance of success.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

[Cleft Crusty]

I don't disagree with the gist of their article, but they always present their arguments in such a "the sky is falling" manner that it really turns me off. Their descriptions of individuals, both players and coaches are generally demeaning, which I think is unnecessary. If you can sift through their pettiness, they sometimes make good points, but I find their presentation to be borderline unprofessional, but unfortunately quite common today.


It's a tough racket, Mr. Patler. I make it a rule never to insult the idiots I'm paid to critique.

[denverYooper]

"But it's also likely....." Likely? Based on what? Rodgers seems to dislike interceptions, but so does MM, and more importantly they have impressed on him over and over that a single play is not worth it if he puts himself at significant risk to make it. If he had thrown the ball for an incompletion or interception, and been leveled by Kiwanuka in the process sustaining a concussion or other injury knocking him out of the game, games or season; McGinn and all the others would complain about his decision making putting himself at significant risk for a play with very limited chance of success.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Excellent point. Rodgers is more wary of his health in certain games vs. others. With 4 division games coming during the stretch, and a likely playoff berth, they need him more than anyone so he has to be economical in the way in which he sells out to win certain games and/or plays. One play that exemplifies this for me is the fumble he jumped on in the AZ game just before the bye.

So too, in the playoffs last year, he took quite a beating and kept stepping into it.

I think that in certain games not deemed as important, that he is less likely to take chances with his health.

[denverYooper]

This, from PFF, via Vandermause (https://twitter.com/MikeVandermause/status/273471372490055680):


Great http://ProFootballFocus.com stat: When Rodgers had 2.6 seconds or more, his QB rating was 125.9. With 2.5 seconds or less, his rating: 25.9.

[PA Pack Fan]

"At times against teams that have been able to apply pressure in front of their two deep zones, Rodgers has made bad reads, pulled the ball down prematurely, gotten antsy with his feet and dumped off balls on third down that had little chance of picking up a first down."

Agree with this statement. Rodgers deserves all the criticisms he gets. The guy played one great, MVP-ish game this year - the 6 tds game VS Houston. The rest, Rodgers was either average or below average.

I agree 100%. He seems to get a free pass on critique, or the usual missing Jennings bullshit excuse. What a croc. He has 3 other world class recievers but somehow this would all change with Jennings in the game.

[Pugger]

Excellent point. Rodgers is more wary of his health in certain games vs. others. With 4 division games coming during the stretch, and a likely playoff berth, they need him more than anyone so he has to be economical in the way in which he sells out to win certain games and/or plays. One play that exemplifies this for me is the fumble he jumped on in the AZ game just before the bye.

So too, in the playoffs last year, he took quite a beating and kept stepping into it.

I think that in certain games not deemed as important, that he is less likely to take chances with his health.

And thank god for that. If we lose Rodgers then we are truly screwed.

[Pugger]

I agree 100%. He seems to get a free pass on critique, or the usual missing Jennings bullshit excuse. What a croc. He has 3 other world class recievers but somehow this would all change with Jennings in the game.

I don't think any of us will give him a pass from the other night. He didn't play well and focused too much on Cobb. But the O line situation didn't help either. After running for his life he got happy feet like ALL QBs do when they get hit a lot back there.

[denverYooper]

I don't think any of us will give him a pass from the other night. He didn't play well and focused too much on Cobb. But the O line situation didn't help either. After running for his life he got happy feet like ALL QBs do when they get hit a lot back there.

Ya Puggs. Not a lot of praise for Rodgers this week.

[Tony Oday]

27 TDs 6 picks and sacked 32 times...yup average QB this year...are you stoned? Check the carbonminoxide detector in your mom's basement because those are damn good stats.

[Pugger]

27 TDs 6 picks and sacked 32 times...yup average QB this year...are you stoned? Check the carbonminoxide detector in your mom's basement because those are damn good stats.

No, he's always hated Rodgers.

[Patler]

27 TDs 6 picks and sacked 32 times...yup average QB this year...are you stoned? Check the carbonminoxide detector in your mom's basement because those are damn good stats.

Ya, but if you take away the "one great, MVP-ish game" he played this year, it's a paltry 21 TDs and 6 picks. Pretty pedestrian. Just "average or below average"! :lol:


Ron Wolf used to say the Packers and their fans were spoiled by watching Brett Favre. That they didn't appreciate what many other teams go through with QB play. I think that may be even more true for Rodgers. For 20 years we have expected our QBs to make plays every week that other teams only see occasionally. For the most part, our QBs have done it. A few other teams have been as lucky as GB, and it looks like the Colts may get back-to-back QBs lake the 49'ers before and the Packers now, but very few teams are as lucky to get just one who has a lengthy career at that level.

[Guiness]

Ya, but if you take away the "one great, MVP-ish game" he played this year, it's a paltry 21 TDs and 6 picks. Pretty pedestrian. Just "average or below average"! :lol:


Ron Wolf used to say the Packers and their fans were spoiled by watching Brett Favre. That they didn't appreciate what many other teams go through with QB play. I think that may be even more true for Rodgers. For 20 years we have expected our QBs to make plays every week that other teams only see occasionally. For the most part, our QBs have done it. A few other teams have been as lucky as GB, and it looks like the Colts may get back-to-back QBs lake the 49'ers before and the Packers now, but very few teams are as lucky to get just one who has a lengthy career at that level.

Indeed. Anyone watching the Panthers/Eagles game last night would appreciate that in spades. How many QB rating points is Rodgers above the NFL average this year? ESPN lists 34 starting QBs, Fitzpatrick is #17 with an 84.9 rating. Rodgers is at 105.6 so far this year - fully 20 points above that.

Oh gawd, I just realized I'm feeding the troll. Oh well, I'm not going to delete it, someone else might be interested. Other interesting things from the list - Alex Smith, seemingly the 'soon to be former starting 49ers QB' is #5 on the list with a 100+ rating. I know he's Capt Check down with the lowest yard/game in the top 10 (by 50) but he is tied for the 2nd highest of the top ten for yd/att, and has the highest completion %age with 70. Cam has the highest yd/att, but is rated down at #23. Two teams have 2 starters listed - Arizona is the obvious one, but Tennesee is the other, I think more from indecision than anything else. I expect Philly and KC will be joining that list, but it looks like Pittsburgh may not. Rodgers has the highest number of sacks.

[woodbuck27]

I don't disagree with the gist of their article, but they always present their arguments in such a "the sky is falling" manner that it really turns me off. Their descriptions of individuals, both players and coaches are generally demeaning, which I think is unnecessary. If you can sift through their pettiness, they sometimes make good points, but I find their presentation to be borderline unprofessional, but unfortunately quite common today.

Holy cow ! Their sports writers and analysts.

Since when are sports writers and analysts diplomatic? Does sports writing have to be diplomatic to check in as professional? It's NOT the case in Canada, where their writing is often downright vitriolic or scathingly and bitterly sarcastic

Unprofessional or mere style? Then in Canada you get to read this sort of analysis and laugh your tits off. This is a fun read:

http://www2.macleans.ca/2012/11/23/nfl-picks-week-12-occasionally-funny-but-never-sanchez-funny/

[Tony Oday]

Maybe we should trade AR for Ponder Straight up!

[woodbuck27]

Indeed. Anyone watching the Panthers/Eagles game last night would appreciate that in spades. How many QB rating points is Rodgers above the NFL average this year? ESPN lists 34 starting QBs, Fitzpatrick is #17 with an 84.9 rating. Rodgers is at 105.6 so far this year - fully 20 points above that.

Oh gawd, I just realized I'm feeding the troll. Oh well, I'm not going to delete it, someone else might be interested. Other interesting things from the list - Alex Smith, seemingly the 'soon to be former starting 49ers QB' is #5 on the list with a 100+ rating. I know he's Capt Check down with the lowest yard/game in the top 10 (by 50) but he is tied for the 2nd highest of the top ten for yd/att, and has the highest completion %age with 70. Cam has the highest yd/att, but is rated down at #23. Two teams have 2 starters listed - Arizona is the obvious one, but Tennesee is the other, I think more from indecision than anything else. I expect Philly and KC will be joining that list, but it looks like Pittsburgh may not. Rodgers has the highest number of sacks.

I know what you mean Guiness but our teams OL and offense has allowed the highest number of QB sacks (37) with five more Vs the GIANTS this week.

Watching that game last night I was impressed with the solid potential we deserve to appreciate as NFL fans in Cam Newton with a QB Rating of 125 Vs the Eagles.

As Packer fans we are certainly spoiled, for the better part now, over two decades.

Aaron Rodgers had a bad game on a bad team this past week Vs a team that ... 'was just prepared' to... 'just win' Vs the Packers. I'm just now wondering if Tom Brady would have fared any better, as our QB, under the same conditions in that matchup Vs the GIANTS? Take away any thoughts of the GIANTS having our number, of late in big games. Would Tom Brady have won that game for us? His QB rating last week was an exceptional and weeks best 139.4 Vs the NY Jets.

If you check below you'll find at least six (6) other top sixteen QB's that suffered a sub par week Vs and considering their overall seasonal QB Rating.

QB Rating this season to date:

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/stats/bycategory?cat=Passing&conference=NFL&year=season_2012&timeframe=ToDate&sort=626&old_category=Passing

QB rating this week:

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/stats/bycategory?cat=Passing&conference=NFL&year=season_2012&timeframe=Week12&qualified=1&sort=49&old_category=Passing

GO PACKERS !

[denverYooper]

Indeed. Anyone watching the Panthers/Eagles game last night would appreciate that in spades. How many QB rating points is Rodgers above the NFL average this year? ESPN lists 34 starting QBs, Fitzpatrick is #17 with an 84.9 rating. Rodgers is at 105.6 so far this year - fully 20 points above that.

Oh gawd, I just realized I'm feeding the troll. Oh well, I'm not going to delete it, someone else might be interested. Other interesting things from the list - Alex Smith, seemingly the 'soon to be former starting 49ers QB' is #5 on the list with a 100+ rating. I know he's Capt Check down with the lowest yard/game in the top 10 (by 50) but he is tied for the 2nd highest of the top ten for yd/att, and has the highest completion %age with 70. Cam has the highest yd/att, but is rated down at #23. Two teams have 2 starters listed - Arizona is the obvious one, but Tennesee is the other, I think more from indecision than anything else. I expect Philly and KC will be joining that list, but it looks like Pittsburgh may not. Rodgers has the highest number of sacks.

I don't have the numbers on me atm but I think Rodgers is something like 10th in sacks per dropback though. Still not great, but not quite so bad as the unscaled total.

[Guiness]

Holy cow ! Their sports writers and analysts.

Since when are sports writers and analysts diplomatic? Does sports writing have to be diplomatic to check in as proffesional? It's NOT the case in Canada, where their writing is often downright vitriolic or scathingly and bitterly sarcastic

Unprofessional or mere style? Then in Canada you get to read this sort of analysis and laugh your tits off. This is a fun read:

http://www2.macleans.ca/2012/11/23/nfl-picks-week-12-occasionally-funny-but-never-sanchez-funny/

Damn, that is funny. Onion quality funny. Love this part. Old hat re-hashed, but well done.



Anyone who follows college sports is weary of the incessant realignment as schools flit about among conferences. But maybe that’s the solution for the woeful Chiefs – maybe it’s time to pick up the phone and see if there’s any room left in the Big Ten. Playing against Indiana, Minnesota and Maryland, this K.C. squad could easily go 6-6 and, fingers crossed, land a sweet, sweet invitation to the Meineke Car Care Bowl. Don’t worry, Romeo Crennel: It’s just like the Super Bowl, but with more mufflers.

[woodbuck27]

Damn, that is funny. Onion quality funny. Love this part. Old hat re-hashed, but well done.

I loved this part:

Feschuk: Interesting stuff, Prof. Numbers – but if ever you want evidence of the utter uselessness of football statistics, consider this: Mark Sanchez was 26-of-36 for 301 yards and a 94.8 quarterback rating in his team’s 49-19 loss to New England. He was also 1-of-1 in his attempts to turn the wrong way on a handoff and run directly into the ass of his lineman, fumbling the ball in the most pathetic and comic way possible. Afterward (and I am not making this up), Sanchez tried to explain what went wrong: “I was,” he said, “thinking of a different play in my head.”

I was scratching my head and in a total conundrum over trying to establish my Pro Pickem picks on Saturday night, when I stumbled upon this LINK. When I began to read it I realized the fun part of being an NFL fan. In parts it's hilarious.

[Rutnstrut]

How is it that stating the facts about Rodgers makes it hating on him. He holds the ball to long, is more worried about stats than winning, and too worried about getting hurt. It's amazing some of you can breath with your nose buried so far up AR's ass.

[Joemailman]

How is it that stating the facts about Rodgers makes it hating on him. He holds the ball to long, is more worried about stats than winning, and too worried about getting hurt. It's amazing some of you can breath with your nose buried so far up AR's ass.

Maybe it's just me, but those sound more like opinions than facts. You're entitled to your own opinions of course, but that doesn't make them facts.

I would argue that stating that Rodgers is more worried about stats than winning amounts to hating. But the fact is, that's just my opinion.

[pbmax]

It also intrigues me how their evaluations of those on IR, out for the game, or retired become so glowing compared to the poor slobs trying to fill in for them. When those same now unavailable players were the ones on the field, they never found as many good things to say about them.

Their approach never changes, and for that reason I find their articles uninteresting. I feel like I know what they will write before the article appears.

I see some of what you do, but more often I find that they are willing to look past the superficial reasons for play breakdowns and assign blame based on scheme and assignment.

Its tough to be consistent as the circumstances change week to week, and I think their up and down opinions, seemingly held hard and fast, are partly a result of drawing a conclusion based on a limited window.

Essentially, I find them a good counterfactual to my viewing of the game and the Game Day thread.

[pbmax]

I agree 100%. He seems to get a free pass on critique, or the usual missing Jennings bullshit excuse. What a croc. He has 3 other world class recievers but somehow this would all change with Jennings in the game.

He has three other world class receivers? You mean the guys who we (the Board) have all tried to trade in the last two years (minus Cobb)? The group that doesn't have a market value contract among them? People love to talk about Favre making his receivers better. How many people were beating a path to Nelson or Jones' door when they got the last contract?

Rodgers has come a long way from the skittish pocket QB he was in 2008 and part of 09. But he is not Favre or Roethlisberger in a dirty pocket. He pulls down faster and looks to escape. And versus the Giants, the D used a DT to spy on him escaping up the middle.

I think this is largely a wise choice by the QB. By no means do I get the sense he is unwilling to stand in there enough to be effective, but I don't think he is as big or durable as Favre or Big Ben. He is not the same size of Ben, Brady or Manning. They need to give him a cleaner pocket and he will be magnificent again. Even Luck, with his size, could shrug Matthews off to stay in the pocket and throw.

I think, like the fabled Cowboys adjustment in 09, McCarthy is going to have to change up the plan and give him more shorter routes until the O line gets its head out of hindquarters. And Cobb (or Jennings when back) has to stop blowing hot read option routes on blitzes.

But keep some perspective if you think I am calling Rodgers lacking toughness in some way. The Giants used the same techniques to clamp down on Favre and force him to throw quick. And they have beaten Brady 3 of the last 4 games.

[OS PA]

Maybe we should trade AR for Ponder Straight up!

I was thinking about trading AR for Jake Long or Joe Thomas. We'd fix the lack of an OT and get rid of our awful quarterback.

[George Cumby]

I was thinking about trading AR for Jake Long or Joe Thomas. We'd fix the lack of an OT and get rid of our awful quarterback.

He is a bum, isn't he? (I get your sarcasm, btw)

Let's take a look at his career stats, shall we?

Completion percentage: 65.5%
Yards: 20,000+
TD: 160
INT: 45
QBR (career): 104.4

(Source: Pro-Football-Reference)

Get rid of the loser!

:bs:

[Rutnstrut]

Maybe it's just me, but those sound more like opinions than facts. You're entitled to your own opinions of course, but that doesn't make them facts.

I would argue that stating that Rodgers is more worried about stats than winning amounts to hating. But the fact is, that's just my opinion.

You are correct they are my opinions, but after all isn't that what 99% of posts on boards are? I am far from a hater of AR, but I have no problem calling out what I see as his flaws either. He is a very good QB that could be great if he would not always play it so safe. You have to admit that sometimes it does look like he is too worried about personal stats. It's also easy to see in interviews that he pouts like a spoiled child anytime he receives a little criticism.

[denverYooper]

You are correct they are my opinions, but after all isn't that what 99% of posts on boards are? I am far from a hater of AR, but I have no problem calling out what I see as his flaws either. He is a very good QB that could be great if he would not always play it so safe. You have to admit that sometimes it does look like he is too worried about personal stats. It's also easy to see in interviews that he pouts like a spoiled child anytime he receives a little criticism.

Rodgers is a great QB already.
QED.

My 1 axiom system and its only proof.

[woodbuck27]

Maybe it's just me, but those sound more like opinions than facts. You're entitled to your own opinions of course, but that doesn't make them facts.

I would argue that stating that Rodgers is more worried about stats than winning amounts to hating. But the fact is, that's just my opinion.

I know you read this but just in case you missed it:

http://www.packersnews.com/article/20121126/PKR07/121126059/Baranczyk-Christl-column-Linemen-aren-t-finishing-blocks?odyssey=tab%7Ctopnews%7Ctext%7CFRONTPAGE&gcheck=1&nclick_check=1

Aaron Rodgers

When the Packers lost in the 2007 postseason, Favre forced a pass that was intercepted and led to the Giants’ game-winning field goal. With Rodgers there is less risk-taking, but still no reward.


Make no mistake about it, the more the Giants’ lead grew the more Rodgers was under siege. But as longtime NFL scout Michael Lombardi wrote for NFL.com last week, “Interceptions are part of the game, and signal-callers who want to win a Super Bowl have to be willing to go for tight throws.”

At times against teams that have been able to apply pressure in front of their two deep zones, Rodgers has made bad reads, pulled the ball down prematurely, gotten antsy with his feet and dumped off balls on third down that had little chance of picking up a first down.

He had more than 4 seconds before he fled the pocket on his first sack. With plenty of time, on second-and-17 in the second quarter, it appeared he could have risked a quick throw down the seam to Jordy Nelson but wound up running for 6 yards.

Just before the end of the third quarter, he scrambled right and threw 10 yards to Nelson when he had time to stand in the pocket and hit Randall Cobb on a post for a 29-yard TD. On the next play, he had good time and rushed a throw to Nelson.

Playing behind a makeshift offensive line with no running game makes it tough on Rodgers, but the Packers aren’t the only contender minus a good back and having problems up front. Aside from running the ball, when the pressure is coming, the best way to beat it is by throwing the ball quick down the middle between the hash-marks.


Comment woodbuck27:

Don't bring up the 'H' word here. Hating....Dear Lord ! That must never happen ... here.

Is it OK to just to be objective and allow for this comment: That....in this last debaucle Vs the GIANTS, and for whatever reason it can be rightfully blamed on; and last time I checked. MM took the blame. I give him credit, even if he emphasizes the obvious.

Another obvious observation: Aaron Rodgers played less than superbly. Do we as PACKER FANS, look at a game and see it differently?

As a sidenote: I want MM and Aaron Rodgers to remove those ugly moustaches. Is that supposed to inform us that their far up one anothers ass's? Get rid of those late adolescent staches. Their a distraction and they look silly. That's easy to do.

As Packer fans, if MM and the Packers wern't aware of it? We had zero excuse not to be fully aware that the GIANTS would be fully ready or prepared to kick the Packers ass's in that game. As fans we were fully aware of the injury situation impact on our team. As fans we had to TRUST that MM would have a decent game plan prepared, to contend with the OL situation and the impact injuries would have on our team. If he thought he had that game plan. It wasn't obvious to many watching that game.

It's OK if you missed that 'fact'. :idea:

Straight up ! This is now obviously alot more than about one really embarassing loss to a good team. Injuries are a part of the NFL. It's called dealing with adversity. On a game to game basis that adversity can be more or less overwhelming but our teams HC has to ensure that our team isn't embarassed. Attention Mike McCarthy.

1. OUR OL sucks. It needs a complete overhaul following this season...again. Attention TT.
2. We need to somehow manage to have a decent rushing option in cases where our OL is overwhelmed by a better teams 'D'. Attention TT.
3. We need to see Aaron Rodgers get rid of the smirks, shrugs and pouts. Attention Aaron Rodgers.
4. We need to see a HC on our teams sidelines that doesn't look like 'a deer caught in the headlights' in BIG games. Attention TT.

I mean... really. Tom Coughlin Vs Mike McCarthy. Good GRIEF !

GO PACKERS !

[denverYooper]

There were some interesting bits on the Caplan/Cosell podcast today about Aaron Rodgers. Listen 20:45-25 for the Packers-specific stuff.
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/fantasyguru/2012/11/29/weekly-matchup

Brief synopsis of Cosell's analysis:
Rodgers is one of the most athletically gifted QBs but he and the offense are not playing particularly well this year. He's is stylistically like Romo in that he seems to randomly go off script in an attempt to make plays, though he has better physical tools and doesn't turn the ball over as much. As a result of his freelancing, he has often missed open throws within the framework of the play design and it is actually hurting the offense some. Cosell feels that could very well be due to the constant pressure on Rodgers. He also mentions that no one is respecting their run game, no matter how much they try to run the ball.

[pbmax]

There were some interesting bits on the Caplan/Cosell podcast today about Aaron Rodgers. Listen 20:45-25 for the Packers-specific stuff.
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/fantasyguru/2012/11/29/weekly-matchup

Brief synopsis of Cosell's analysis:
Rodgers is one of the most athletically gifted QBs but he and the offense are not playing particularly well this year. He's is stylistically like Romo in that he seems to randomly go off script in an attempt to make plays, though he has better physical tools and doesn't turn the ball over as much. As a result of his freelancing, he has often missed open throws within the framework of the play design and it is actually hurting the offense some. Cosell feels that could very well be due to the constant pressure on Rodgers. He also mentions that no one is respecting their run game, no matter how much they try to run the ball.

I can square that with my gut feeling that it is Rodgers who goes deep on 3rd and short when its single safety and the play call is something more mundane.

What's funny is that this "trying to make a play" places Rodgers very much in the same vein as Favre, young Favre anyway. Remember when he would Tarkenton around, even running into his own O line (we'll call that a Sanchez from now on) trying to free himself and find space to make a play well after most QBs would give it up?

Rodgers does that as well, though plan B in a collapsing pocket for AR is looking more to rollout or perhaps run than Favre, would was really just trying to recreate a pocket someone behind the LOS. I don't think Rodgers can absorb the hits like Favre could (wasn't he 250 at one point?) and thus likes more space.

Which means that like with Favre, who got cheered when he threw the ball away (completely OOB not nearly a pic from a pop fly like he used to toss) fans at Lambeau should cheer extra loud when Rodgers completes a 5 yards pass or less.

[Fritz]

I can square that with my gut feeling that it is Rodgers who goes deep on 3rd and short when its single safety and the play call is something more mundane.

What's funny is that this "trying to make a play" places Rodgers very much in the same vein as Favre, young Favre anyway. Remember when he would Tarkenton around, even running into his own O line (we'll call that a Sanchez from now on) trying to free himself and find space to make a play well after most QBs would give it up?

Rodgers does that as well, though plan B in a collapsing pocket for AR is looking more to rollout or perhaps run than Favre, would was really just trying to recreate a pocket someone behind the LOS. I don't think Rodgers can absorb the hits like Favre could (wasn't he 250 at one point?) and thus likes more space.

Which means that like with Favre, who got cheered when he threw the ball away (completely OOB not nearly a pic from a pop fly like he used to toss) fans at Lambeau should cheer extra loud when Rodgers completes a 5 yards pass or less.

And if a QB's face runs into his offensive lineman's butt, we'll call that a Dirty Sanchez!

[Cheesehead Craig]

As a sidenote: I want MM and Aaron Rodgers to remove those ugly moustaches. Is that supposed to inform us that their far up one anothers ass's? Get rid of those late adolescent staches. Their a distraction and they look silly. That's easy to do.


THey grew them for Movember, to help bring awareness to prostate and testicular cancer. They will be gone for Sunday's game.

[QBME]

And if a QB's face runs into his offensive lineman's butt, we'll call that a Dirty Sanchez!

Too funny!

[Zool]

You are correct they are my opinions, but after all isn't that what 99% of posts on boards are? I am far from a hater of AR, but I have no problem calling out what I see as his flaws either. He is a very good QB that could be great if he would not always play it so safe. You have to admit that sometimes it does look like he is too worried about personal stats. It's also easy to see in interviews that he pouts like a spoiled child anytime he receives a little criticism.

But did you say


How is it that stating the facts about Rodgers makes it hating on him. He holds the ball to long, is more worried about stats than winning, and too worried about getting hurt. It's amazing some of you can breath with your nose buried so far up AR's ass.

This is all very confusing.

[PA Pack Fan]

He has three other world class receivers? You mean the guys who we (the Board) have all tried to trade in the last two years (minus Cobb)? The group that doesn't have a market value contract among them? People love to talk about Favre making his receivers better. How many people were beating a path to Nelson or Jones' door when they got the last contract?

How many would trade half their team for one of them, right now?

[mraynrand]

It's amazing some of you can breath with your nose buried so far up AR's ass.

I use a snorkel.

[George Cumby]

I use a snorkel.

Actually, I'm so far up his ass, I breath using his lips.

[pbmax]

How many would trade half their team for one of them, right now?

Having better O personnel than the Jaguars, Chiefs and Jets doesn't make them world class. I am not saying they are bad at all, but only Jennings is a do it all type.

[Patler]

I am far from a hater of AR, but I have no problem calling out what I see as his flaws either. He is a very good QB that could be great if he would not always play it so safe. You have to admit that sometimes it does look like he is too worried about personal stats.

Just curious, why do you attribute his dislike of interceptions solely to him? Might it not also come from the coaches? MM has often mentioned how crucial he thinks it is to avoid interceptions. Now this attributed to Clements:


The message was simple, direct. Tom Clements once told Aaron Rodgers that every possession should end in a kick. An extra point. A field goal. A punt.

Those should be the only options. At all costs, avoid turnovers.


http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/packers-rodgers-tries-to-avoid-turnovers-in-his-diet-5k7r3n2-181302351.html

It is the mindset of the coaching staff, and Rodgers is a willing follower of the philosophy. However, I don't think it has anything to do with concern for his personal stats. I think he, Clements and MM are convinced it is a mindset that is beneficial to consistently winning.

[Fritz]

My biggest criticisms of Rodgers are these: that he passes up wide open options short in favor of higher-risk plays down the field far too often, and that he holds the ball too long and takes a sack when he could throw the ball away. The latter he doesn't do all the time, but often enough that it's an issue for me.

In a sense, I would argue that he's not adjusting to the offensive line's weakness. Sure he is awesome when he gets some time - but he ain't getting much right now.

This team doesn't run a west-coast offense any more. Holmgren used to ignore the clamor for a running game by having Favre throw the little three to five yard plays to his backs. That was the running game. This could help this team right now.

Then, when the linebackers start to play tighter....

[Patler]

Sacks resulting from Rodgers holding the ball too long don't bother me all that much, except for the injury risk that goes with them. The times he holds the ball too long and is sacked don't usually lose a lot of yardage. Only a couple times has he continued fading deeper and deeper. Usually he drifts closer to the LOS and the loss is small. When he extends a play and scrambles outside the pocket, he generally gets back within a couple yards of the LOS (basically, about like a typical Packer running play :()

[Fritz]

Good point, Patler. I do stick with my other criticism, however. Where are those short throws over the middle? What happened to using the running backs running short routes as your running game? This would seem to play to Green's strengths, at least.

[Pugger]

Sacks resulting from Rodgers holding the ball too long don't bother me all that much, except for the injury risk that goes with them. The times he holds the ball too long and is sacked don't usually lose a lot of yardage. Only a couple times has he continued fading deeper and deeper. Usually he drifts closer to the LOS and the loss is small. When he extends a play and scrambles outside the pocket, he generally gets back within a couple yards of the LOS (basically, about like a typical Packer running play :()

I don't have a problem with it either. Don't throw the ball up for grabs. Take your lumps rather than give your opposition an extra chance. I too worry about the injury risks that go with sacks.

[George Cumby]

I don't have a problem with it either. Don't throw the ball up for grabs. Take your lumps rather than give your opposition an extra chance. I too worry about the injury risks that go with sacks.

Right. Sack or a brain-dead toss into triple coverage? I'll take the sack, please.

[ThunderDan]

Remeber when GB lost to Detroit in 2010 3-7 and Rodgers was knocked out with a concussion and everyone was sure we were toast and wouldn't make the playoffs?

[LEWCWA]

Sacks resulting from Rodgers holding the ball too long don't bother me all that much, except for the injury risk that goes with them. The times he holds the ball too long and is sacked don't usually lose a lot of yardage. Only a couple times has he continued fading deeper and deeper. Usually he drifts closer to the LOS and the loss is small. When he extends a play and scrambles outside the pocket, he generally gets back within a couple yards of the LOS (basically, about like a typical Packer running play :()

this is the thing you would usually, what they say patlerize, this is and opinion without anything to back it up. I would say that when he gets sacked it is a ngative play and usually loses much more than a couple yards!

the sacks suck big time. Arod had a bad game, along with the rest of the team in general! The only thing that really bothered me was the throw away at the end of the half. You have to chuck the ball up. That was a total give up and speaks volumes about the way the last game was played by the whole team!

[sharpe1027]

IMO, whether to take the sack is not a black and white issue. While taking a sack is better than throwing an interception, we certainly cannot say that every single sack was an avoided interception. There is risk to every single pass so if the only goal is to avoid interceptions, he would never throw the ball at all. I think he could take a little more risk because overall, taking 8 sacks in a game (many leading to punts) is probably worse than a pick or two. When you factor in the possibility of a fumble or him getting hurt, it shifts even further in the favor of being at least a little more aggressive with his throws.

Fritz commented on him not making short throws over the middle, and from my unofficial memory of the Giants game, they showed several instances of the coverage after a sack and sometimes there was nobody was running a short route over the middle at all. That's on MM.

[LegandofthePack15]

Right. Sack or a brain-dead toss into triple coverage? I'll take the sack, please.

Sack or an incomplete pass? I'll take the incomplete pass, please.

Rodgers needs to stop holding the ball longer than it takes Bob Dole to play a round of golf. When no one's open and pressure is a-coming, throw the fucking ball away. Ryan, Brees and Brady do that all the time. Unlike Rodgers, those guys don't give a fuck about their qb ratings.

[Pugger]

Remeber when GB lost to Detroit in 2010 3-7 and Rodgers was knocked out with a concussion and everyone was sure we were toast and wouldn't make the playoffs?

But he wasn't lost for the season and we had a decent backup behind him instead of Graham Harrell. :shock:

[mraynrand]

Caution: unintentional irony alert!


Ryan, Brees and Brady do that all the time. Unlike Rodgers, those guys don't give a fuck about their qb ratings.

Oh, the Humanity! Brees threw it away five times the other night. he he.

[Patler]

Good point, Patler. I do stick with my other criticism, however. Where are those short throws over the middle? What happened to using the running backs running short routes as your running game? This would seem to play to Green's strengths, at least.

I agree. I've complained about that ever since MM got here. He doesn't have the passes to replace the running game.

[Patler]

this is the thing you would usually, what they say patlerize, this is and opinion without anything to back it up. I would say that when he gets sacked it is a ngative play and usually loses much more than a couple yards!

the sacks suck big time. Arod had a bad game, along with the rest of the team in general! The only thing that really bothered me was the throw away at the end of the half. You have to chuck the ball up. That was a total give up and speaks volumes about the way the last game was played by the whole team!

Didn't I present it as only my opinion? All I said was they don't bother me, and I gave my reason which includes impressions. Just an impression on my part while watching games generally. I said it was my feeling and explained my observation of how plays tend to unfold. Go ahead and disagree if you want. I'm not about to argue it.

I didn't argue that others are wrong, if I wanted to convince others to change their opinions I would have to present facts or other supporting information. If you want to convince me that my opinion is wrong, you will have to present facts or information to convince me to change my mind.

I have never objected to anyone having an opinion. I primarily object to people presenting inaccurate information that they insist is incontrovertible. Did I do that in presenting my opinion about Rodgers sacks? Did I argue that any other poster was wrong?

Games are filled with a lot of negative plays. I can accept that.

I agree about the last game, and have posted in other threads that there was plenty of blame to go around. It happens. No one is perfect.

Interestingly, Clements agreed with Rodgers throw away before the half, for the reason that to stop and launch the long pass he likely would have been drilled by a defensive player.

[Patler]

IMO, whether to take the sack is not a black and white issue. While taking a sack is better than throwing an interception, we certainly cannot say that every single sack was an avoided interception. There is risk to every single pass so if the only goal is to avoid interceptions, he would never throw the ball at all. I think he could take a little more risk because overall, taking 8 sacks in a game (many leading to punts) is probably worse than a pick or two. When you factor in the possibility of a fumble or him getting hurt, it shifts even further in the favor of being at least a little more aggressive with his throws.

Fritz commented on him not making short throws over the middle, and from my unofficial memory of the Giants game, they showed several instances of the coverage after a sack and sometimes there was nobody was running a short route over the middle at all. That's on MM.

Ya, I suggested a couple years ago that we will always argue about sacks with Rodgers like we did with interceptions for Favre. Each accepts them in the hopes of making a better play. We can never know for sure how many great plays resulted from Favre taking an inordinate risk on a throw, or how many plays Rodgers has made by holding the ball too long and not throwing it away. In the long run, sacks don't bother me as much as the turnover from an interception. Punts are not necessarily bad things either, so the negative yardage from a sack doesn't bother me a lot.

Until the last few weeks, Rodgers has been remarkably secure with the ball on sacks. Apparently it is something he works on a lot, per an article last year. The last few games the ball has been coming out on sacks, a few recovered by the Packers. I wonder why?

[Patler]

Sack or an incomplete pass? I'll take the incomplete pass, please.

Rodgers needs to stop holding the ball longer than it takes Bob Dole to play a round of golf. When no one's open and pressure is a-coming, throw the fucking ball away. Ryan, Brees and Brady do that all the time. Unlike Rodgers, those guys don't give a fuck about their qb ratings.

As Sharpe pointed out, it is never that clear. How many times has he held the ball too long, and then made a last instance throw for a completion?

[pbmax]

Sack or an incomplete pass? I'll take the incomplete pass, please.

Rodgers needs to stop holding the ball longer than it takes Bob Dole to play a round of golf. When no one's open and pressure is a-coming, throw the fucking ball away. Ryan, Brees and Brady do that all the time. Unlike Rodgers, those guys don't give a fuck about their qb ratings.

Easier said than done while standing in the pocket because you must throw near a receiver. If he rolls, the odds of his throwing it away increase.

I agree with GC that I prefer a sack of less than seen yards to a pick, but its not a one to one ratio. Versus the Giants, it was time to make some uncomfortable throws into close coverage and take the risk. Sack avoidance needed to take precedence over possession since there were no points happening with the safe throws.

Packer fans can help by cheering every short throw (even incompletions) by Rodgers/McCarthy like they used to cheer young Favre finally throwing it away.

[woodbuck27]

Just curious, why do you attribute his dislike of interceptions solely to him? Might it not also come from the coaches? MM has often mentioned how crucial he thinks it is to avoid interceptions. Now this attributed to Clements:



http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/packers-rodgers-tries-to-avoid-turnovers-in-his-diet-5k7r3n2-181302351.html

It is the mindset of the coaching staff, and Rodgers is a willing follower of the philosophy. However, I don't think it has anything to do with concern for his personal stats. I think he, Clements and MM are convinced it is a mindset that is beneficial to consistently winning.

I can buy into what you post here Patler but:

On NFL Access this morning I watched Sterling Sharpe give analysis of film that clearly demonstrated Aaron Rodgers clearly holding onto the ball too long when receivers were clearly open for a pass. As a result of this analysis Sterling Sharpe had to conclude that Aaron Rodgers and not just OL play was responsible for a large part of his NFL leading 37 SACKS; that Aaron Rodgers indecisiveness contributes to his own failure to move our offense.