The odd decision to combine QB & WR coaching - the real reason?

[Patler]

Everyone scratched their head when it was announced, and few have been surprised that it seemingly failed. The question still remained, however; what was MM thinking when he did it? We finally might have an answer from the GBPG:



The move was intended to give Van Pelt more responsibility and exposure after the Packers blocked him from interviewing for St. Louis’ offensive coordinator position

A move to placate Van Pelt? Did he demand something of expanded responsibility? Did he shoot himself in the foot by failing? Did his name come up this year at all for any vacancies?

[Pugger]

I thought the reason was Mike thought it would be a good idea to have both the QBs and WRs in the same meetings?

[Guiness]

I thought the reason was Mike thought it would be a good idea to have both the QBs and WRs in the same meetings?

I believe that story came from the players, in particular a couple of WRs who said they felt they knew a lot more about the offense by being present at the QB meetings.

[wist43]

Everyone scratched their head when it was announced, and few have been surprised that it seemingly failed. The question still remained, however; what was MM thinking when he did it? We finally might have an answer from the GBPG:



A move to placate Van Pelt? Did he demand something of expanded responsibility? Did he shoot himself in the foot by failing? Did his name come up this year at all for any vacancies?

There's a rule that says a team can't block a coach's advancement. If Van Pelt were being offered a coordinator job, which would be an advancement from position coach, the only way the Packers could block the move, would be if they offered him some sort of advancement in terms of responsibility and title.

It seems to have backfired to whatever extent as the offense looked lost and dysfunctional all season.

[Patler]

I thought the reason was Mike thought it would be a good idea to have both the QBs and WRs in the same meetings?

Well, that is what they put out there for media consumption, but it never made much sense to me. Can't they be in the same meetings, even with individual dedicate coaches? There always seemed like there must be something more to it.

[Patler]

There's a rule that says a team can't block a coach's advancement. If Van Pelt were being offered a coordinator job, which would be an advancement from position coach, the only way the Packers could block the move, would be if they offered him some sort of advancement in terms of responsibility and title.

It seems to have backfired to whatever extent as the offense looked lost and dysfunctional all season.

I'm not sure that is still the case. I think it might be limited to just HC and assistant HC positions.

[3irty1]

You'd think more collaboration between the positions would lead to more chemistry between passer and receiver instead of making it look like they'd never met before.

Like all west-coast offenses we've always depended mostly on timing routes. This leverages the receiver's knowledge of where they are going and when they are going to get there in order to help them get open because the ball can be thrown before their cut. Anytime a QB has to wait for the receiver to break, a DB will notice and jump the route. Its been a natural fit for us as its actually advantaged by the poor footing in bad weather. Its great for play callers; it gives them the ability to call the equivalent of a change-up in the route tree. Timed breaks tend to set up WR for lots of YAC as well. But dependency on timing routes is also why we historically do so poorly against press coverage. A WR like Jordy who's got size to throw around and the speed to pull away from a whiff in press coverage can mitigate the weakness enough to win with.

My theory was that MM was looking to cure this weakness by shifting away from timing routes and was forced to double down on that shift with the loss of Jordy Nelson. The alternative to timing routes is to give your WR's more on-field decisions. If the WR and QB can read the defense the same way in real time and come to the same decision you get a route that is very difficult for the DB to obstruct because they'll always have the wrong leverage. This would explain why we saw so many passes thrown as if the receivers ran routes Rodgers wasn't expecting. It explains why Rodgers looked so uncomfortable, having not just more complicated reads but a new source of trust issues with receivers who need to be able to read the coverage the way he would. It explains why Janis was so slow to see action since the position was suddenly thought to be more demanding between the ears. It explains why the playcalling seemed to suffer and why there was so little YAC.

[pbmax]

I'm not sure that is still the case. I think it might be limited to just HC and assistant HC positions.

The rule is far more limited than most people expect. It applies only to Head Coaching jobs now. Even if its an upgrade, the team can block any coach under contract from interviewing with another team for any job other than HC.

[Patler]

The rule is far more limited than most people expect. It applies only to Head Coaching jobs now. Even if its an upgrade, the team can block any coach under contract from interviewing with another team for any job other than HC.

One of the problems under the old process was determining what was and wasn't advancement. Was OC with playcalling responsibility an advancement over OC with the Packers? Was "Secondary" an advancement over "Cornerbacks"?

Of course, even the new rule only applies while the coach is under contract. Since most assistant contracts are two years, every other year the coach can roll the dice and not sign his extension until after the "hunting season" for new coaches starts, to see if teams are interested in him. This would run the risk of his old team revoking its offer. I have a vague recollection of talk about a Packer assistant having done that a few years ago.

[pbmax]

I don't think he went away from timing routes to beat press man specifically. But he did move away from typical WCO routes to implement a no huddle where he could run 3WR, 1TE and 1RB full time and went more to pre-snap reads, which I think is where the play clock at 0 has suddenly become a regular feature. It also takes away the previous big feature of his offense, which was multiple personnel groupings. A defense had to prepare for 4 groups they likely would see. And I assume he sent them in as a reaction to what the defense was doing to counter him. Once you found one they weren't ready for or could not defend, you ride it for awhile until they change.

Problem with the no huddle as its currently operating is that once teams have film, they know how they want to counter it. Since its the same lineup each time, you have less options to counter. And so you are literally moving through the teeth of a defense. Then you must audible, everyone has to adjust and with receivers 5, 6 snd 7 that's tough. Even with more starters, there was no one to keep safeties looking deep. So everyone is close to the LOS.

Eventually, the routes were changed and the WRs were grouped and motioned more and they threw different stuff short. It worked for awhile but that was not as effective as the regular offense. It was never as functional as the Patriots death by 12 short pass attempts per drive attack.

It was after he made those changes that I began to agree with Rand that the WR corp had been too depleted, and was too similar, to be effective overall no matter the play call. They could manage it versus average teams, but not playoff defenses.

Janis and Abby were the only options eventually, but they came to that conclusion WAY too late. One reason I have hope for Adams is that the team and QB never gave up hope (much to their detriment). They threw Boykin on the bench after 3 games. They still believed in Adams in the playoffs.

[pbmax]

One of the problems under the old process was determining what was and wasn't advancement. Was OC with playcalling responsibility an advancement over OC with the Packers? Was "Secondary" an advancement over "Cornerbacks"?

Of course, even the new rule only applies while the coach is under contract. Since most assistant contracts are two years, every other year the coach can roll the dice and not sign his extension until after the "hunting season" for new coaches starts, to see if teams are interested in him. This would run the risk of his old team revoking its offer. I have a vague recollection of talk about a Packer assistant having done that a few years ago.

It was McAdoo I think.

[Pugger]

I don't think he went away from timing routes to beat press man specifically. But he did move away from typical WCO routes to implement a no huddle where he could run 3WR, 1TE and 1RB full time and went more to pre-snap reads, which I think is where the play clock at 0 has suddenly become a regular feature. It also takes away the previous big feature of his offense, which was multiple personnel groupings. A defense had to prepare for 4 groups they likely would see. And I assume he sent them in as a reaction to what the defense was doing to counter him. Once you found one they weren't ready for or could not defend, you ride it for awhile until they change.

Problem with the no huddle as its currently operating is that once teams have film, they know how they want to counter it. Since its the same lineup each time, you have less options to counter. And so you are literally moving through the teeth of a defense. Then you must audible, everyone has to adjust and with receivers 5, 6 snd 7 that's tough. Even with more starters, there was no one to keep safeties looking deep. So everyone is close to the LOS.

Eventually, the routes were changed and the WRs were grouped and motioned more and they threw different stuff short. It worked for awhile but that was not as effective as the regular offense. It was never as functional as the Patriots death by 12 shot pass attempts per drive attack.

It was after he made those changes that I began to agree with Rand that the WR corp had been too depleted, and was too similar, to be effective overall no matter the play call. They could manage it versus average teams, but not playoff defenses.

Janis and Abby were the only options eventually, but they came to that conclusion WAY too late. One reason I have hope for Adams is that the team and QB never gave up hope (much to their detriment). They threw Boykin on the bench after 3 games. They still believed in Adams in the playoffs.

Adams looked pretty good against Washington too until he got hurt again. I hope this isn't going to be an issue for him and 2015 was just bad luck...