Rodgers and sack time.

[Upnorth]

http://www.advancednflstats.com/2013/05/exploring-causes-of-sack-pt-1.html?m=1

Very interesting article with a fairly obvious conclusion, that a major contributor to sacks is time (I'm oversimplying). Does anyone one know arod's average hold time on throwing plays?

[woodbuck27]

http://www.advancednflstats.com/2013/05/exploring-causes-of-sack-pt-1.html?m=1

Very interesting article with a fairly obvious conclusion, that a major contributor to sacks is time (I'm oversimplying). Does anyone one know arod's average hold time on throwing plays?

Here's an article on that Upnorth. Unfortunately the Tabular Info. is missing but I may have some thing else. I have to check that out.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2012/11/07/signature-stat-snapshot-time-to-throw/

Later...

OK add this LINK and info but we're still not there. We need (pbmax maybe? / anyone else here please ) to tie this down:

http://www.thegridironpalace.com/forums/index.php?/topic/62469-signature-stat-snapshot-time-to-throw/

Ok in this LINK there's info. specific to Aaron Rodgers:

http://www.bleedinggreennation.com/2012/11/8/3618322/pff-michael-vick-is-holding-onto-the-ball-too-long

" It should come as no surprise that Michael Vick comes in 2nd in the NFL in time to throw at 3.12 seconds per dropback, trailing only rookie Russell Wilson. That Wilson is a rookie is no coincidence. Of the top 6 QBs in terms of time to throw, 3 are rookies and one, Cam Newton, is a second year player.

No top or elite QBs can be found in the top 10. Aaron Rodgers does come in at #11, but even he's closer to 2.7 seconds.

To take it a step further, PFF found that 2.5 seconds to throw the ball was a sort of optimal time for pass protectors." Fr. LINK immediately above.


GO PACK GO !

[woodbuck27]

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2013/05/29/examining-pressure-qb-play/

Examining Pressure: QB Play

Steve Palazzolo | May 29, 2013

When Facing Any Pressure

Now who are the best quarterbacks when pressured?

(Aaron) Rodgers is the best in the league when under heat and it’s not all that close. It’s certainly impressive to see a number of rookies on this list despite having the small sample of only one season under their belt. Notice the quick drop-offs into negative PFF grades – pressure has a major effect on the quarterback."

PACKERS !

[pbmax]

He definitely contributes to the team total for sacks. But it isn't as bad as it was in 2009.

[pittstang5]

This makes me think of something else too. I wonder how many times Arod took a sack on 3rd down and moved them out of FG range or had he just thrown it way, turned a 35 yard FG attempt into a 45 or longer attempt.

[Tony Oday]

Lol field goal range...take the sack and punt Crosby Sucks.

[RashanGary]

This makes me think of something else too. I wonder how many times Arod took a sack on 3rd down and moved them out of FG range or had he just thrown it way, turned a 35 yard FG attempt into a 45 or longer attempt.

Honestly, I don't think he does that very often. I think he plays good situation football. Just going off memory, I think AR plays smart when we're in field goal range, smart in the redzone, smart between the 20's, smart with time, smart in just about every way a player can be smart.

[Joemailman]

Honestly, I don't think he does that very often. I think he plays good situation football. Just going off memory, I think AR plays smart when we're in field goal range, smart in the redzone, smart between the 20's, smart with time, smart in just about every way a player can be smart.

He's certainly smart when the Packers are in scoring range. But there are times he could be smarter on 1st and 2nd down when he could avoid a sack by throwing the ball away or dumping it off to a back. I don't mind the sacks on 3rd down so much because there is no point dumping the ball off for a gain that is short of the 1st down. There are times though where a dumpoff is a good play that can create good down and distance rather than taking a sack which results in 3rd and long.

[RashanGary]

He's certainly smart when the Packers are in scoring range. But there are times he could be smarter on 1st and 2nd down when he could avoid a sack by throwing the ball away or dumping it off to a back. I don't mind the sacks on 3rd down so much because there is no point dumping the ball off for a gain that is short of the 1st down. There are times though where a dumpoff is a good play that can create good down and distance rather than taking a sack which results in 3rd and long.

I could definitely see slight modification to his 1st and 2nd down (non-scoring range) plays. As he turns 30, I think he should really make an effort to get rid of the ball quicker.

[RashanGary]

And we all talk about Rodgers weapons, but let's face it, there were only maybe 2 years of Favre's career that he had starting running backs similar to Rodgers the last 2 or 3 years. A running game is just as big of a deal, if not bigger than the 4th and 5th receiving options.

A part of AR getting rid of the ball quicker is going to be running the ball so defenses have to change their pass-aggressive looks at least some of the time. Hopefully the running game helps on 1st and 2nd down, non-scoring plays.

[Carolina_Packer]

And we all talk about Rodgers weapons, but let's face it, there were only maybe 2 years of Favre's career that he had starting running backs similar to Rodgers the last 2 or 3 years. A running game is just as big of a deal, if not bigger than the 4th and 5th receiving options.

A part of AR getting rid of the ball quicker is going to be running the ball so defenses have to change their pass-aggressive looks at least some of the time. Hopefully the running game helps on 1st and 2nd down, non-scoring plays.

Yeah, think how much differently the down and distance situation could be improved if the Pack can establish an effective ground game. Besides down and distance, it's how the defense has to bring additional help to respect the run instead of committing so much to obvious pass pro. If that can free up a receiver to get a one on one, that will certainly help. Also, if Harris or Franklin (presumably both 3rd down change of pace backs) could help in the 3rd and short, check down situations where A-Rod needs to get rid of it to avoid the rush.

[mraynrand]

And we all talk about Rodgers weapons, but let's face it, there were only maybe 2 years of Favre's career that he had starting running backs similar to Rodgers the last 2 or 3 years. A running game is just as big of a deal, if not bigger than the 4th and 5th receiving options.

QFT. It's a testament to how big a shadow Favre cast that an enormous weapon like Ahman Green is hardly talked about anymore. For a stretch of about 5 years, Green was in the top 3 backs with yards from scrimmage, right up there with LT from San Diego and whatchamaface* from KC.



*Priest Holmes

[woodbuck27]

And we all talk about Rodgers weapons, but let's face it, there were only maybe 2 years of Favre's career that he had starting running backs similar to Rodgers the last 2 or 3 years. A running game is just as big of a deal, if not bigger than the 4th and 5th receiving options.

A part of AR getting rid of the ball quicker is going to be running the ball so defenses have to change their pass-aggressive looks at least some of the time. Hopefully the running game helps on 1st and 2nd down, non-scoring plays.

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/content/nfl-today-the-golden-age-the-ground-game/22693/

NFL Today: The Golden Age Of The Ground Game

Cold, Hard Football Facts for May 09, 2013

" But those same rules that have made it so easy to pass the ball have also opened up things underneath for running backs, too. Much like air superiority allowed Allied infantry in World War II or the Gulf War to dominate the battlefield below, passing superiority has given running backs a chance to overrun defenses like never before.

In fact, it’s never been easier to run the football than it is today. Conversely, it's never been tougher to play run defense." Fr. LINK above

GO PACKERS !

[woodbuck27]

QFT. It's a testament to how big a shadow Favre cast that an enormous weapon like Ahman Green is hardly talked about anymore. For a stretch of about 5 years, Green was in the top 3 backs with yards from scrimmage, right up there with LT from San Diego and whatchamaface* from KC.



*Priest Holmes

Is it possible that the way that Ahman Green flamed out in Houston may have been a factor in him (possibly) being somewhat or forgotten? I loved the Packer 'O' with Ahman Green operating in high gear.

PACKERS!

[cheesner]

QFT. It's a testament to how big a shadow Favre cast that an enormous weapon like Ahman Green is hardly talked about anymore. For a stretch of about 5 years, Green was in the top 3 backs with yards from scrimmage, right up there with LT from San Diego and whatchamaface* from KC.



*Priest Holmes

And there was also very effective Dorsey Levens and an above average Edgar Bennet. Neither superstars, but all 3 better than we have had since.

[woodbuck27]

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/content/nfl-today-the-golden-age-the-ground-game/22693/

NFL Today: The Golden Age Of The Ground Game

Cold, Hard Football Facts for May 09, 2013

" But those same rules that have made it so easy to pass the ball have also opened up things underneath for running backs, too. Much like air superiority allowed Allied infantry in World War II or the Gulf War to dominate the battlefield below, passing superiority has given running backs a chance to overrun defenses like never before.

In fact, it’s never been easier to run the football than it is today. Conversely, it's never been tougher to play run defense." Fr. LINK above

GO PACKERS !

Comment woodbuck27:

Yet ... is this not a full circle subject? Where does the running game really stand with the passing game?

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/content/the-50-club-best-rushing-teams-nfl-history/22686/

The 5.0 Club: Best Rushing Teams in NFL History

Cold, Hard Football Facts for May 09, 2013

" Of the 42 teams that averaged 5.0 YPA or more, only four won championships, and two of those were in the AFL. Many of the greatest rushing teams in history were downright bad. Note, for example, the 2011 Panthers or 2011 Vikings.

The NFL was, is and always will be a league dominated by teams that rule the skies, not the ground." Fr. LINK above

GO PACK GO !

[mraynrand]

Is it possible that the way that Ahman Green flamed out in Houston may have been a factor in him (possibly) being somewhat or forgotten?

why would that make any difference regarding his time in Green Bay?

[woodbuck27]

why would that make any difference regarding his time in Green Bay?

It didn't to me as I'm a Green Bay Packer fan.

PACKERS!

[mraynrand]

Much like air superiority allowed Allied infantry in World War II or the Gulf War to dominate the battlefield below, passing superiority has given running backs a chance to overrun defenses like never before.

In fact, it’s never been easier to run the football than it is today. Conversely, it's never been tougher to play run defense.

if true, this makes the Packers inability to run the ball even more pathetic. The reality is that most defenses are content to give a collection of running plays if they can stop the huge passing plays. That's essentially how defenses treated the Packer offense last year - who cares if you get 100 yards on the ground if you can't get quick, long passing TDs? Even run heavy teams have to have a defense and some passing capability to be successful. In today's NFL, running is mostly easier because teams are far less focused on defending it.

[Upnorth]

if true, this makes the Packers inability to run the ball even more pathetic. The reality is that most defenses are content to give a collection of running plays if they can stop the huge passing plays. That's essentially how defenses treated the Packer offense last year - who cares if you get 100 yards on the ground if you can't get quick, long passing TDs? Even run heavy teams have to have a defense and some passing capability to be successful. In today's NFL, running is mostly easier because teams are far less focused on defending it.

Considering how great our passing o is, I think we must have a historically bad rush O given leauge trends. I realize we are not to much below league average, however outside of NO, Den and NE what teams have as devestating a passing game as we do???

[Pugger]

And there was also very effective Dorsey Levens and an above average Edgar Bennet. Neither superstars, but all 3 better than we have had since.

Yes, these 2 and Ahman were better than any RB who played with Rodgers up to this year. Let's hope the kids we brought in this spring will fix that.

[Pugger]

I wonder if the problem of not being able to run the ball was a combination of not having a superior back and the emphasis on pass blocking over run blocking in practice. Heck, Benson made our run game look almost respectable last season before he injured his foot and that poor guy can't find another job now.

[pbmax]

if true, this makes the Packers inability to run the ball even more pathetic.

Agree with this. You can't get more favorable conditions, with everyone in nickel at the drop of a hat. Our offense looks like San Fran during the Derek Loville days. I can't believe it took me this long to realize that.

[mraynrand]

Agree with this. You can't get more favorable conditions, with everyone in nickel at the drop of a hat. Our offense looks like San Fran during the Derek Loville days. I can't believe it took me this long to realize that.

I remember when the Colts visited GB in 2008. GB starts in a nickel, and there just wasn't anything the Colts could do about it. There at least has to be some proficiency at running the ball to make teams pay for ignoring the threat to run. Hopefully the Packers will have that fixed this year.

[woodbuck27]

Yes, these 2 and Ahman were better than any RB who played with Rodgers up to this year. Let's hope the kids we brought in this spring will fix that.

Ryan Grant. He was decent after Aaron Rodgers became our starter.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryan_Grant#Green_Bay_Packers

" After a somewhat disappointing season in 2008, where Grant rushed for only four touchdowns and 3.9 yards per carry (did eclipse 1,000 rushing yards), Grant had a bounce-back year in 2009, where he rushed for 1,253 yards, third in the NFC, and 11 touchdowns, second in the NFC. He also added 4.4 yards per carry.

For the 2010 Pro Bowl, Grant was named a back-up alternate, along with teammates Chad Clifton, A.J. Hawk, and Clay Matthews." fr. LINK above

PACKERS !

[Pugger]

Wood, I think Green, Bennett and Levens were better than Grant.

[Smeefers]

Grant was a better back behind Favre than he was behind Rodgers. Mostly because Defenses were terrified Favre was going to make them pay one way or another. Man, I remember that year, Favre carries the team on his back, then out of nowhere we pick up some nobody off the Giants practice squad after 13 of our running backs get hurt and the dude blows up huge. Grant had a good run in GB with a pair of 1000 yard seasons where he really was a good back. A shame he got hurt. Never was the same after that.

That being said, Grant was dependable. He was never really a break away threat. He was a one cut guy who'd go down on the first hit maybe 65% of the time. He had some talent but Ahman Green he was not. I'd actually compare his *effectiveness favorably to Edgar Bennett.

*Not his style, stats or anything else.

[pbmax]

Grant was a better back behind Favre than he was behind Rodgers. Mostly because Defenses were terrified Favre was going to make them pay one way or another. Man, I remember that year, Favre carries the team on his back, then out of nowhere we pick up some nobody off the Giants practice squad after 13 of our running backs get hurt and the dude blows up huge. Grant had a good run in GB with a pair of 1000 yard seasons where he really was a good back. A shame he got hurt. Never was the same after that.

That being said, Grant was dependable. He was never really a break away threat. He was a one cut guy who'd go down on the first hit maybe 65% of the time. He had some talent but Ahman Green he was not. I'd actually compare his *effectiveness favorably to Edgar Bennett.

*Not his style, stats or anything else.

Not early in the season. Favre and the offense really struggled out of the gate. Defense carried the team in the first half of the season. Then the offense started to come on and so did Grant.

Grant did have several good years, it just ended too early to really help Rodgers.

[Joemailman]

Not early in the season. Favre and the offense really struggled out of the gate. Defense carried the team in the first half of the season. Then the offense started to come on and so did Grant.

Grant did have several good years, it just ended too early to really help Rodgers.

Favre struggled Game 1, but then he started lighting it up. He ripped apart Giants and Chargers in weeks 2 & 3. It was all passing though, as the running game didn't kick in until Grant entered the lineup.

[pbmax]

Favre struggled Game 1, but then he started lighting it up. He ripped apart Giants and Chargers in weeks 2 & 3. It was all passing though, as the running game didn't kick in until Grant entered the lineup.

3 of first 6 games he was blehh. 2 of them were cringeworthy. The Giants game was the one shining moment for DeShawn Wynn. Grant took over in Game 6.


Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Rush Rush Rush Rush
Rk G Date Age Tm Opp Result GS Cmp Att Cmp% Yds TD Int Rate Y/A AY/A Att Yds Y/A TD
1 1 2007-09-09 37-334 GNB PHI W 16-13 * 23 42 54.76% 206 0 1 58.2 4.90 3.83 1 -2 -2.00 0
2 2 2007-09-16 37-341 GNB NYG W 35-13 * 29 38 76.32% 286 3 1 112.4 7.53 7.92 2 -2 -1.00 0
3 3 2007-09-23 37-348 GNB SDG W 31-24 * 28 45 62.22% 369 3 0 110.3 8.20 9.53 2 1 0.50 0
4 4 2007-09-30 37-355 GNB MIN W 23-16 * 32 45 71.11% 344 2 0 108.0 7.64 8.53 4 1 0.25 0
5 5 2007-10-07 37-362 GNB CHI L 20-27 * 29 40 72.50% 322 1 2 83.5 8.05 6.30 0 0 0
6 6 2007-10-14 38-004 GNB WAS W 17-14 * 19 37 51.35% 188 0 2 43.5 5.08 2.65 3 8 2.67 0
7 7 2007-10-29 38-019 GNB DEN W 19-13 * 21 27 77.78% 331 2 0 142.4 12.26 13.74 2 -8 -4.00 0
8 8 2007-11-04 38-025 GNB KAN W 33-22 * 24 34 70.59% 360 2 2 100.1 10.59 9.12 2 -1 -0.50 0
9 9 2007-11-11 38-032 GNB MIN W 34-0 * 33 46 71.74% 351 3 0 115.4 7.63 8.93 1 1 1.00 0
10 10 2007-11-18 38-039 GNB CAR W 31-17 * 22 30 73.33% 218 3 0 126.8 7.27 9.27 3 -3 -1.00 0
11 11 2007-11-22 38-043 GNB DET W 37-26 * 31 41 75.61% 381 3 0 128.2 9.29 10.76 2 -1 -0.50 0
12 12 2007-11-29 38-050 GNB DAL L 27-37 * 5 14 35.71% 56 0 2 8.9 4.00 -2.43 0 0 0
13 13 2007-12-09 38-060 GNB OAK W 38-7 * 15 23 65.22% 266 2 1 115.5 11.57 11.35 0 0 0
14 14 2007-12-16 38-067 GNB STL W 33-14 * 19 30 63.33% 225 2 2 80.6 7.50 5.83 3 -3 -1.00 0
15 15 2007-12-23 38-074 GNB CHI L 7-35 * 17 32 53.13% 153 0 2 40.2 4.78 1.97 3 0 0.00 0
16 16 2007-12-30 38-081 GNB DET W 34-13 * 9 11 81.82% 99 2 0 143.7 9.00 12.64 1 21 21.00 0
16 Games 356 535 66.54% 4155 28 15 95.7 7.77 7.55 29 12 0.41 0

[Upnorth]

Grant was consistent, gain positive yardage and not give up the ball (with one playoff game as a big exception).
He is the most talented rb of the Rodgers era, but he was also running behind the best line. I really wonder what a 'stud' rb would do behind our line.

[woodbuck27]

Wood, I think Green, Bennett and Levens were better than Grant.

Ohh ... that's interesting. What're you basing that on Pugger ? Going to the record book. Ryan Grant is one of a handful of the best RB's in Green Bay Packer history.

Only... Ahman Green of your three mentioned has better numbers than Ryan Grant's stat's.

Ahman Green is the leading rusher ALL TIME as a Green Bay Packer. Only his and Jim Taylor's, John Brockington's and Tony Canadeo's rushing numbers exceed Ryan Grant's.


http://www.footballdb.com/teams/nfl/green-bay-packers/alltime-rushing

Check out Dorsey Levens and Edgar Bennett's numbers Vs Ryan Grant's. Then I believe you'll understand my position here Pugger.

Have a nice day.

GO PACKERS!

[Upnorth]

Ohh ... that's interesting. What're you basing that on Pugger ? Going to the record book. Ryan Grant is one of a handful of the best RB's in Green Bay Packer history.

Only... Ahman Green of your three mentioned has better numbers than Ryan Grants.

Ahman Green is the leading rusher ALL TIME as a Green Bay Packer. Only his and Jim Taylor's, John Brockington's and Tony Canadeo's rushing numbers exceed Ryan Grants.


http://www.footballdb.com/teams/nfl/green-bay-packers/alltime-rushing

Check out Dorsey Levens and Edgar Bennett's numbers out Vs Ryan Grant's.

GO PACKERS!

I argued till the cows came home that Ryan Grant was better than Lynch back when that was a topic, and Grant was good till he was injured. For our offense he was the exact thing we needed, consistent positive yardage and low turnovers. I hope one of our two drafts can play a similar style.

[Fritz]

May Eddie Lacey be the next Ahman Green.

[bobblehead]

http://www.advancednflstats.com/2013/05/exploring-causes-of-sack-pt-1.html?m=1

Very interesting article with a fairly obvious conclusion, that a major contributor to sacks is time (I'm oversimplying). Does anyone one know arod's average hold time on throwing plays?

He holds the ball too long. I can see it, don't need metrics. Always has been his weakness (now his only one really), always will be. He needs to hit his checkdown receiver more often. Maybe when he goes to the Vikings he will suddenly start hitting chester taylor on those plays instead of throwing it up for....er holding it too long.

[bobblehead]

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2013/05/29/examining-pressure-qb-play/

Examining Pressure: QB Play

Steve Palazzolo | May 29, 2013

When Facing Any Pressure

Now who are the best quarterbacks when pressured?

(Aaron) Rodgers is the best in the league when under heat and it’s not all that close. It’s certainly impressive to see a number of rookies on this list despite having the small sample of only one season under their belt. Notice the quick drop-offs into negative PFF grades – pressure has a major effect on the quarterback."

PACKERS !

His sacks are from holding the ball. He is the absolute most deadly assassin against the blitz I have ever seen at any level anywhere doing anything.

[RashanGary]

if true, this makes the Packers inability to run the ball even more pathetic. The reality is that most defenses are content to give a collection of running plays if they can stop the huge passing plays. That's essentially how defenses treated the Packer offense last year - who cares if you get 100 yards on the ground if you can't get quick, long passing TDs? Even run heavy teams have to have a defense and some passing capability to be successful. In today's NFL, running is mostly easier because teams are far less focused on defending it.

I'm very curious to see a healthy Green, Eddie Lacy and Jonathan Franklin. Between the three, one could easily be a player. Our OL hasn't changed at all, personnel-wise. Position changes, yeah, but that's more of a pass protection thing, I think. I've heard Larry McCarren say the RB makes the line, not the other way around. Just like our running game dropped off badly after we lost Ryan Grant, it could pick up greatly with the addition of someone new. I'll start buying in, big, to Larry's opinion that the running back makes the running game go if we do suddenly take off. I'm crossing my fingers.

[bobblehead]

Honestly, I don't think he does that very often. I think he plays good situation football. Just going off memory, I think AR plays smart when we're in field goal range, smart in the redzone, smart between the 20's, smart with time, smart in just about every way a player can be smart.

Yep, redzone numbers are SICK!!! A few years ago he had something like 26 scores of 28 redzone trips with ZERO turnovers.

[bobblehead]

Comment woodbuck27:

Yet ... is this not a full circle subject? Where does the running game really stand with the passing game?

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/content/the-50-club-best-rushing-teams-nfl-history/22686/

The 5.0 Club: Best Rushing Teams in NFL History

Cold, Hard Football Facts for May 09, 2013

" Of the 42 teams that averaged 5.0 YPA or more, only four won championships, and two of those were in the AFL. Many of the greatest rushing teams in history were downright bad. Note, for example, the 2011 Panthers or 2011 Vikings.

The NFL was, is and always will be a league dominated by teams that rule the skies, not the ground." Fr. LINK above

GO PACK GO !

Stats wag the dog quite often.

[Pugger]

Ohh ... that's interesting. What're you basing that on Pugger ? Going to the record book. Ryan Grant is one of a handful of the best RB's in Green Bay Packer history.

Only... Ahman Green of your three mentioned has better numbers than Ryan Grant's stat's.

Ahman Green is the leading rusher ALL TIME as a Green Bay Packer. Only his and Jim Taylor's, John Brockington's and Tony Canadeo's rushing numbers exceed Ryan Grant's.


http://www.footballdb.com/teams/nfl/green-bay-packers/alltime-rushing

Check out Dorsey Levens and Edgar Bennett's numbers Vs Ryan Grant's. Then I believe you'll understand my position here Pugger.

Have a nice day.

GO PACKERS!

I see Dorsey's numbers are just a tad behind Grant's but not substantially. Bennett's aren't that far behind either. I don't know if those numbers are that much different between Grant, Bennett and Levens. Unfortunately for Grant he got hurt and was never the same.

[run pMc]

Tough on the OL to hold the ball longer for >= 3 seconds. Especially GB's OL last year with Bulaga IR'd (and that's ignoring the turnstile game vs. Bruce Irvin), Lang with a gimpy elbow, and a washed up Saturday.

Rodgers is very good against the blitz and would rather take a sack than an interception -- maybe he's OCD about passer rating, but he absolutely hates INTs. He's holding it longer to try and make a play. I don't mind that occasionally, but I'd rather see him dump it off to a back on 3rd down than take a sack -- he doesn't get hit, and he at least gives the RB a chance to make play for the 1st down marker. The problem has been the backs haven't been very good at that -- Franklin might change that, and maybe a healthy Green. Starks was supposed to have great hands coming out of college but it seems like I've seen him drop a lot of passes.

[run pMc]

Green and Levens were better than Grant.
Bennett was just a bit better than Grant IMO. Bennett was a tough, dependable, and a good receiver, but he wasn't going to run away from anyone. Grant had better speed, but I'd rather have Bennett to get me three 4th quarter yards in snowy/muddy conditions.

Grant was better than Morency and some of the other guys in between/after those guys. Grant had a short but pretty decent career with GB. Had something like 1200 yards back to back seasons, which is way better than anything we've had in the last two seasons.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/9475/ryan-grant

[pbmax]

Stats wag the dog quite often.

Stats don't wag the dog by the tail. People do.

[MadScientist]

I see Dorsey's numbers are just a tad behind Grant's but not substantially. Bennett's aren't that far behind either. I don't know if those numbers are that much different between Grant, Bennett and Levens. Unfortunately for Grant he got hurt and was never the same.
Dorsey was close, and possibly a bit better than Grant before he got hurt in 98. After that he wasn't nearly as good. Levens was used as a receiver much more, but how much of that was player and how much was scheme is hard to tell. Bennett was a plugger who never fumbled, but his YPC was in line with Barty Smith, Terdell Middleton and Darrell Thompson. Not exactly a guy that opposing defenses feared.

Back to Rodgers and holding the ball long. His numbers against the blitz show that he can be quick and decisive. Against coverage he holds the ball waiting for a receiver to come open past the point where the OL can't stop the rush. The OL needs to be better at stonewalling the defense when there is no blitz, the receivers need to be better at getting open against the coverage, and Rodgers needs to give up on the down field option a bit quicker.

[ThunderDan]

Personally I like having a QB that would rather eat the ball and take a sack then chuck it up to a 50/50 situation. You loose so much field position on every turnover.

I wouldn't mind seeing more dump offs and balls out of bounds too.

[MadScientist]

Personally I like having a QB that would rather eat the ball and take a sack then chuck it up to a 50/50 situation. You loose so much field position on every turnover.

I wouldn't mind seeing more dump offs and balls out of bounds too.

Something I was noticing on the RB receiving stats. Levens and Green had tons of receptions. Grant's biggest year in terms of number of catches was 2007 despite having significantly fewer rushing attempts than in 2008-9. While it is possible that somehow Grant was in for more passing plays in 07 than in 08-9, it is not very likely. MM could have also changed the offense to go 5 wide more often or if there was a back he was stuck blocking. The one undisputed change was the QB change. It does really look like AR needs to dump off more, at least at first glance.

[Upnorth]

http://m.espn.go.com/general/blogs/blogpost?blogname=nfcnorth&id=57286

So it appears Rodgers ranks 35th for time in pocket and had the highest sack rate at 8.0%. In spite of a poorish ol, part of the blame is definitely on Rodgers.

[pbmax]

Dorsey was close, and possibly a bit better than Grant before he got hurt in 98. After that he wasn't nearly as good. Levens was used as a receiver much more, but how much of that was player and how much was scheme is hard to tell. Bennett was a plugger who never fumbled, but his YPC was in line with Barty Smith, Terdell Middleton and Darrell Thompson. Not exactly a guy that opposing defenses feared.

Back to Rodgers and holding the ball long. His numbers against the blitz show that he can be quick and decisive. Against coverage he holds the ball waiting for a receiver to come open past the point where the OL can't stop the rush. The OL needs to be better at stonewalling the defense when there is no blitz, the receivers need to be better at getting open against the coverage, and Rodgers needs to give up on the down field option a bit quicker.

That is perhaps the biggest difference between McCarthy and the other Mike's WCO. Much less passing to backs.

[bobblehead]

Stats don't wag the dog by the tail. People do.

My point is that a team that is so built around the run that it manages a 5.0 avg probably isn't good enough at passing.

The Denver team that beat us in the superbowl was dominant in the run game, but Elway had enough left in the tank as a passer to win the big game. Balance is key, you must be able to run the ball effectively, but you also must be able to pass it on 3rd and 4.

[woodbuck27]

Personally I like having a QB that would rather eat the ball and take a sack then chuck it up to a 50/50 situation. You loose so much field position on every turnover.

I wouldn't mind seeing more dump offs and balls out of bounds too.

Yes.

PACKERS !

[Noodle]

AR may hold the ball a little long, but I think that stat is affected by how often he has to bail and move around because the rush is on him so fast.

He really doesn't seem to get the opportunity to just drop, set, and throw.

Too often its drop, duck, bob, weave, move, then either throw or get drilled.

[RashanGary]

Favre had 14 sacks in 2007 behind a Clifton/Colledge/Wells/Spitz/Tauscher line

Rodgers had 34 sacks in 2008 behind the same OL


I think the QB has a lot to do with the sack numbers. AR holds the ball. I think it's obvious. He risks his body, loses yards, but makes a ton of big plays doing it. It is what it is. He's the best QB in the game right now. He has his own style. It's won one championship so far. It works.

We don't have to gloss over everything he does though, like there is not give and take. He does take a lot of sacks and a lot of them are because he doesn't unload the ball quickly like some other QB's do. He's more like Big Ben in that he'd rather hang on to the ball and make something happen.

[ThunderDan]

BF had 15 INTs in 2007
ARod had 13 INTs in 2008 as a first year starter.

That was ARod's worst year for INTs.

[packer4life]

balls out of bounds too.

THANK YOU. This, to me, is Rodgers' only weakness. He will take a sack instead of throwing a ball at his HB's feet; he will take a sack instead of getting outside the tackles and throwing it into the stands. I am fine with a no-throw to prevent a field-postion ruining INT, but I am not OK with Rodgers taking a preventable sack!

[3irty1]

There are certainly the "duh" plays that are frustrating to watch when it comes to Rodgers not throwing it away. I think I've even seen him run out of bounds to lose 3 or 4 yards rather than toss it away. I think its worth noting though that 90% of these seem to be on 3rd down. Rodgers doesn't mind taking a sack vs throwing it away if the next play is a punt anyways... he'd rather compete on 3rd down as long as possible and extend the play. Once in a while he wiggles out of the situation and makes a throw. Its not the most invalid strategy.

[Pugger]

Yes, Rodgers does hang onto the ball too long and is loathe to throw it away into the stands. Besides the loss of yards my biggest problem with him taking all these hits is we just cannot afford to lose him to injury! :shock:

[woodbuck27]

Yes, Rodgers does hang onto the ball too long and is loathe to throw it away into the stands. Besides the loss of yards my biggest problem with him taking all these hits is we just cannot afford to lose him to injury! :shock:

MM and his QB coach have to make Aaron Rodgers realize that's a very real possibility unless he somehow changes his style.