McCarthy's Offense: McAdoo Edition

[pbmax]

McCarthy has been called out for a predictable Offensive attack a LOT in the last three years by X and O writers. He succeeds because he has the best QB in the game executing it, and because Nelson and Cobb excel at making the extended offense work.

You have seen this in many ways. The preponderance the 11 personnel group* for the Packers (3 wides, 1 RB, 1 TE) that invites the Defense to throw out its nickel and then let the Packer offense choose whether to run or pass based on how many are in the box.

Part of this is McCarthy's change to his offseason installation of offense during camp. This happened when the CBA altered the camp practice schedule. He wanted to install less volume. One immediate difference was that he sent out different personnel groups out less frequently. In 2009, 10 and 11, he sent waves of people out there almost every play. Each formation causing the defense to react and substitute, giving M3 the matchup he wanted. It helped he had 4 starting caliber WRs plus Michael Finley.

The loss of Finley also helps explain some of the change, though in a any 11 personnel, you need an effective TE. But without a monster at TE, its much easier to deal with both running and receiving threats in the middle of the field. This was also the era where several good D teams found that you could slow down the Packer O with solid 2 Man defense. That is, man coverage at the LOS, and 2 deep safeties. Packers weren't designed to beat that coverage quickly.

The great Packer Offensive Drought of 2015 and 16 was also driven by more than changes to the offseason schedule or film. Receivers were hurt and the depth at WR was sparse. There was no TE and no middle of the field game. Patler will be along shortly to remind us that M3 once said Favre loved throwing into the middle of the field, Rodgers loved going outside. Without a personnel advantage in the middle, most of Rodgers looks go outside, giving the defense an advantage.

However, the Great O Drought made something else glaringly obvious: McCarthy's simplified offense did little to help over matched skill position talent. In previous years, he has added plays to help the TE or slot WR get open against isolated coverage. Or he sent out personnel groups to force substitutions on Defense then call a counter intuitive play (pass out of heavy formation, usually a roll out).

But he dramatically announced before 2015 (maybe that was 2016) that they had done too much of this and needed to win matchups one on one and not rely on scheming or new plays. So there was little in the new O to help out-matched receivers against good man coverage and M3 was stubbornly not going to add it.

McCarthy has also never been fond of going off script, he prefers to stick with the play calls they have practiced off the game plan even when its late and the team is behind. It takes a true calamity before they reopen the back of the playbook. Holmgren's Favre teams did this more routinely, pulled a play back from earlier in the season and the team loved to talk about their ability to do this. But only once do I remember M3 talking about a call back like that. He talked about it like it was one of the stranger things to have happened to him on the sideline. Also, because in that case I think the play worked.

By the end of the Drought, McCarthy had given up sticking with the skinny playbook and Cook gave him a player he could matchup with Cobb to make the middle of the defense miserable. Cook also was very good, read: fast, at running crossing routes. Somewhere in a more banjo thread is a video of Jordy Nelson running a crossing route I think prior to Cook's return to functioning. Its there not because it was successful, it was, but because no one could remember anyone running a crossing route versus man coverage since Finley.

However, lest you think this is an indictment, McCarthy has basically reneged on the no scheming stance in 2017. This season has featured a LOT of stacks (2 receivers in a line) or bunch formations (3 receivers) to get a receiver a clean release off the LOS. The only thing he has not added is motion. The Packers do motion, but its for the pre snap read or to influence the defense, not to get the WR a free release.


* that's shorthand means # of running backs/# of TEs. Their are almost always 5 skill positions on the field, so the difference equals the number of WRs. 11 personnel is 1 RB/1 TE, 3 WR. 0/1 is empty backfield and a TE. 1/0 is RB with no TE and 4 wides.

[pbmax]

So what does this have to do with Ben McAdoo?

Read this: http://www.nj.com/giants/index.ssf/2017/10/odell_beckham_said_what_everyone_except_ben_mcadoo .html

McAdoo left the Packers after 2013. After the offense had been slimmed down and the 11 personnel because predominant. Outside of Beckham, if you watch the Giants on offense, its like watching the Packer Drought offense minus Aaron Rodgers but plus inaccurate Eli Manning.

Its football evolution working to snuff out a variant that isn't successful. McCarthy had Rodgers and it allowed him time to come to his senses. McAdoo doesn't have that luxury. Its amazing they have been this patient.

[pbmax]

Its one thing when a player says they know what you are doing. Defenders only say this when they are winning. No CB said we know what play is coming but you torched me for a TD anyway. The comment that caught my eye is from Cincy's D coordinator to Sean McDonough.


But with the Giants 0-4 and ranked 30th in the NFL in scoring, Beckham shared a conversation he had with Buccaneers cornerback Vernon Hargreaves after Sunday's 25-23 loss.

"He was just like, 'You know, we know a lot of what you're doing,' " Beckham said.

That's a damning comment, but it's also not the first time an opponent has pointed out the Giants' predictability. Monday Night Football announcer Sean McDonough relayed a conversation with Bengals defensive coordinator Paul Guenther about how simple it was to prepare for the Giants' West Coast offense during the broadcast of their Week 10 meeting last season.

[pbmax]

There are personnel factors at work with the Giants as well. Beckham has been hurt and they lost his running mate Victor Cruz to injuries and physical ineffectiveness. Sterling Shepard has only begun to assert himself.

They have no TE threat.

And the O line is the worst position group on the team.

Still, McAdoo is being stymied by the same Cover 2 man that almost undid Rodgers and McCarthy.

[mraynrand]

How about this analogy from basketball. You know the phrase "he can make his own shot" - the better/great players can get open and then have an easier shot. Packer wide receivers lacked this during the drought. Jennings could make his own shot, that is, get open against press man coverage. But he declined/left. Rodgers could do the equivalent with Nelson on sideline outs and comebacks, but when Nelson got injured, both options were gone. I don't think Nelson will ever return to top form, so it's essential to run those other schemes. Or maybe draft a WR who can get open.

It would be nice if they'd use Bennett up the seam instead of the short outs and 3 yard buttonhooks.

[Fritz]

So you're concluding, PB, that MM has worked his way out of that slump he was in?

Whew. I was tired of him trying to grit his teeth and force things. Great coaches roll with what they're given.

[vince]

McCarthy has been called out for a predictable Offensive attack a LOT in the last three years by X and O writers. He succeeds because he has the best QB in the game executing it, and because Nelson and Cobb excel at making the extended offense work.
You have seen this in many ways. The preponderance the 11 personnel group* for the Packers (3 wides, 1 RB, 1 TE) that invites the Defense to throw out its nickel and then let the Packer offense choose whether to run or pass based on how many are in the box.
…
This was also the era where several good D teams found that you could slow down the Packer O with solid 2 Man defense. That is, man coverage at the LOS, and 2 deep safeties. Packers weren't designed to beat that coverage quickly.
…
However, the Great O Drought made something else glaringly obvious: McCarthy's simplified offense did little to help over matched skill position talent. In previous years, he has added plays to help the TE or slot WR get open against isolated coverage. Or he sent out personnel groups to force substitutions on Defense then call a counter intuitive play (pass out of heavy formation, usually a roll out).
…
But he dramatically announced before 2015 (maybe that was 2016) that they had done too much of this and needed to win matchups one on one and not rely on scheming or new plays. So there was little in the new O to help out-matched receivers against good man coverage and M3 was stubbornly not going to add it.
…
By the end of the Drought, McCarthy had given up sticking with the skinny playbook and Cook gave him a player he could matchup with Cobb to make the middle of the defense miserable. Cook also was very good, read: fast, at running crossing routes. Somewhere in a more banjo thread is a video of Jordy Nelson running a crossing route I think prior to Cook's return to functioning. Its there not because it was successful, it was, but because no one could remember anyone running a crossing route versus man coverage since Finley.
Here’s what really happened. McCarthy used significantly MORE 11 personnel (28% increase) and more 20 personnel (empty backfield – highly predictable play selection with no RB), simplified the offense by calling more plays designed with fewer reads and/or dictating to Rodgers to make fewer progressions/adjustments and get the ball out more quickly – and it opened up the entire offense.
https://www.sharpfootballstats.com/personnel-grouping-frequency.html
Amazing site for custom team stats BTW


2016 Tale of 2 Seasons

All Personnel Groupings Used >1% of the Time, Run/Pass Rates and Success/Production

Weeks 1-11 Record 4-6
Personnel:..............1-1 [3WR]...0-1 [4WR]...1-2 [2WR]...0-0 [5WR]... 2-1 [2WR]...2-0 [3WR]
% of Total Plays:.........46%...........22%.............8%... ..........8%.............6%.............3%
Total Plays:................306.............143......... .....52...............51.............40........... ....23
Successful Play Rate:...47%............49%...........38%.......... ..45%...........40%............48%
Pass ATT:...................213..............121....... ......22...............41.............14.......... ......7
Pass Rate:..................70%............85%......... ...42%............80%..........35%...........30%
Successful Pass %:......47%............48%............32%......... ...44%..........29%...........71%
Passer Rating:.............99.7............89.4.......... ..110.............99.6..........101.8..........113 .7
Run Rate:...................30%............15%........ ....58%...........20%............65%...........70%
Successful Run %:........46%...........55%............43%........ ...50%............46%...........38%
Pass TDs:INT:.............12:6.............7:2......... ....1:0..............3:0.............0:0.......... ...0:0
Rush TDs:....................3.................0....... ..........0................0.................0.... ...........0


Weeks 12-21 Record 9-1
Personnel:...............1-1 [3WR]...0-1 [4WR]...2-0 [3WR]...1-2 [2WR]...2-1 [2WR]...2-2 [1WR]
% of Total Plays:...........59%.........13%...........9%..... ........6%.............5%.............3%
Total Plays:...................332...........75......... ....50..............35..............28............ ...15
Successful Play Rate:......52%.........60%.........56%............ 31%..........39%.............33%
Pass ATT:.......................233..........54........ ....19...............16...............14.......... .....3
Pass Rate:.....................70%..........72%........ 38%............46%...........50%............20%
Successful Pass %:.........50%..........56%........63%............ 38%...........43%...........100%
Passer Rating:................116.7........146.2......115 .6..........124.7..........79.8............136.8
Run Rate:......................30%..........28%....... ..62%...........54%..........50%.............80%
Successful Run %:..........55%..........71%.........52%.......... .26%..........36%.............17%
Pass TDs:INT:................14:2...........5:0........ ..0:0.............2:0............0:0.............. 2:0
Rush TDs:........................6..............2...... .......0................2...............0......... ........1

For the year 2016, the Giants operated out of 11 personnel 92% of the time compared to the Packers 52%. Those stats don’t relate to McCarthy or either team’s relative slump to one another whatsoever.

[vince]

He may be using more stacks and bunches but I found no empirical evidence to support that.

[vince]

Teams still try to man up with 2 deep. They've gotten more effective at attacking it with guys who are healthy and can separate on quick hits to beat man-on-man, which brings the safeties up more and gets LBers on their heels a bit. That helps the running game and they also get some better opportunities later on to hit intermediate routes and get over the top on occasion. It's not something McCarthy just figured out.

[vince]

https://nextgenstats.nfl.com/stats/passing/2017/all

Rodgers
........Time to Throw..CAY..IAY..AYD..AGG%
2016....2.87.............6.5..9.4...-2.9...16.4
2017....2.72.............5.3..7.3...-2......20.1

Time To Throw (TT)
Time to Throw measures the average amount of time elapsed from the time of snap to throw on every pass attempt for a passer (sacks excluded).

Average Completed Air Yards (CAY) and Average Intended Air Yards (IAY)
Air Yards is the total yards gained on a pass attempt past the line of scrimmage before the ball is caught. CAY shows the average Air Yards a passer throws on completions, and IAY shows the average Air Yards a passer throws on all attempts. This metric shows how far the ball is being thrown ‘downfield’. Air Yards is recorded as 0 when the pass is thrown to or behind the Line of Scrimmage. Additionally Air Yards is not calculated into the back of the end zone.

Average Air Yards Differential (AYD)
Air Yards Differential is calculated by subtracting the passer’s average Intended Air Yards from his average Completed Air Yards. This stat indicates if he is on average attempting deep passes than he on average completes.

Aggressiveness (AGG%)
Aggressiveness tracks the amount of passing attempts a quarterback makes that are into tight coverage, where there is a defender within 1 yard or less of the receiver at the time of completion or incompletion. AGG is shown as a % of attempts into tight windows over all passing attempts.
______________________________

Rodgers is getting the ball out quicker, on shorter throws and willing to throw into tighter coverage this year than last. I couldn't break last year down by game but I'd bet a lot of money that he held the ball longer and threw to receivers farther downfield on average the first 10 games than the last 10. That trend has continued into this year.

[vince]

The great Packer Offensive Drought of 2015 and 16 was also driven by more than changes to the offseason schedule or film. Receivers were hurt and the depth at WR was sparse. There was no TE and no middle of the field game. Patler will be along shortly to remind us that M3 once said Favre loved throwing into the middle of the field, Rodgers loved going outside. Without a personnel advantage in the middle, most of Rodgers looks go outside, giving the defense an advantage.

Directional Pass Frequency (https://www.sharpfootballstats.com/directional-pass-frequency--off-.html)
.................................................. .......Left.....Middle....Right
2016 "Great O Drought" (weeks 1-11)....38%....23%....38%
2016 "Run the Table" (weeks (12-21).....39%....18%....42%
2017 so far..........................................42%.. ..21%.....38%

When the offense struggled, they threw down the middle of the field more often (though less effectively) than since it's returned to higher productivity.

[mraynrand]

those directional numbers don't look all that different to me, but there are no confidence intervals so what can I say

[vince]

This turn around has had more to do with McCarthy tightening up the leash (slightly and often temporarily depending on offensive flow) on Rodgers inclination to improvise and the receivers' ability to separate quickly vs. man coverage than any "creativity" he gained, or lack of it previously. He's a creative offensive mind, which was partially what caused some problems during the drought. The innovative "second level" attack is his brainchild, but like all innovations, there are often bumps in the road and adjustments to be made.

Rodgers and the whole offense benefits from some structure early, and then he can open up the second level attack once they get things going. The full arsenal of healthy receivers makes all the difference too.

[vince]

Agreed, which indicates that some mythical middle of the field attack change not only didn't impact the turnaround, but didn't exist in the first place.

[RashanGary]

Rodgers and the whole offense benefits from some structure early, and then he can open up the second level attack once they get things going. The full arsenal of healthy receivers makes all the difference too.

I agree with this.

[call_me_ishmael]

The offense does seem to have recovered from the 2015 and early 2016 debacles but it still doesn't feel like it is humming along as it should or did in 2014. ARod is too good for the results we're seeing. It still seems like the home run threat is never there and we're constantly dinking and dunking to get down the field. Admittedly, I'm unable to watch the games as closely these days so I could very well be off base here.

A theory I don't totally believe, but have considered, is Jordy Nelson is an average #2 right now, and Devante Adams is not a great player. Cobb has the most "athletic" ability but he is still so small.

Anyway, I do not want to pay Adams big bucks at the end of this year. He never seems to get any separation at all. That is the exact opposite of Nelson and Jennings, who both lived up to their 2nd contracts. They consistently had separation.

[vince]

Green Bay's offense is ranked 8th in points and 16th in yards having played against the 3rd (Cin.), 9th (Chi), 13th (Atl) and 14th (Sea) ranked defenses so far.

Falcons and Bengals in particular have gotten after QB's (each rank 3rd with 12) which is usually GB's offensive achilles heal. That's proven out so far this year as well. Rodgers was sacked 13 times in their 3 worst point producing games and only twice when they racked up 35 on the Bears.

With Guards playing Tackle and UDFA rookies starting on the o-line, I'd say the offense has done pretty well getting in the end zone and should only get better.

They've been particularly good in the most important situations that drive point production - #1 in the league in Red Zone TD % and #3 in 3rd Down Conversion Rate. They'll win a lot of games if they keep up that situational production - and the defense continues to hold up.

Individually, I tend to agree with you about Adams from a contract standpoint. He's a good possession guy who can get off the line and fight for balls but a complimentary guy who is fortunate to fit the Packers' and Rodgers' game pretty well. If someone wants to pay up for him like the Vikes did for Jennings, he could easily fall of the cliff harder and faster than Jennings did post-GB.

Rodgers and the Packers scheme spreads the ball around so much by knowing defensive tendencies, matchups and attacking what the defense gives them rather than targeting any of their guys like most teams do with their 1's, so it can be tough to judge individual production. That said, Football Outsiders has Nelson as the #2 ranked receiver in the league right now. Cobb is #22 and Adams is #24. A couple teams (Rams and Vikes) have their top 2 guys higher than GB's top 2, but no one matches GB's top 3.

[vince]

Over the course of the whole year (good and bad) the more consistently the Packers maintained 11 personnel, the more points they scored.

2016 11 Personnel Frequency and Scoring by Quarter

Qtr...11 Freq....Pts./game...NFL Rank
1.......48%.........5.3.............10th
2.......61%.........9.1..............3rd
3.......49%.........4.8..............14th
4.......50%.........8.5..............4th

[Pugger]

How about this analogy from basketball. You know the phrase "he can make his own shot" - the better/great players can get open and then have an easier shot. Packer wide receivers lacked this during the drought. Jennings could make his own shot, that is, get open against press man coverage. But he declined/left. Rodgers could do the equivalent with Nelson on sideline outs and comebacks, but when Nelson got injured, both options were gone. I don't think Nelson will ever return to top form, so it's essential to run those other schemes. Or maybe draft a WR who can get open.

It would be nice if they'd use Bennett up the seam instead of the short outs and 3 yard buttonhooks.

Rodgers does like to often wait and see if he can make the bigger play and passes on throwing to the open player underneath. I also think Bennett's numbers will improve once our starting tackles are back and he doesn't have to block as much.

[Pugger]

The offense does seem to have recovered from the 2015 and early 2016 debacles but it still doesn't feel like it is humming along as it should or did in 2014. ARod is too good for the results we're seeing. It still seems like the home run threat is never there and we're constantly dinking and dunking to get down the field. Admittedly, I'm unable to watch the games as closely these days so I could very well be off base here.

A theory I don't totally believe, but have considered, is Jordy Nelson is an average #2 right now, and Devante Adams is not a great player. Cobb has the most "athletic" ability but he is still so small.

Anyway, I do not want to pay Adams big bucks at the end of this year. He never seems to get any separation at all. That is the exact opposite of Nelson and Jennings, who both lived up to their 2nd contracts. They consistently had separation.

Really? To me Adams seems like he is better at getting separation than you suggest.

[mraynrand]

Agreed, which indicates that some mythical middle of the field attack change not only didn't impact the turnaround, but didn't exist in the first place.

yep. Good stuff Vince.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Green Bay's offense is ranked 8th in points and 16th in yards having played against the 3rd (Cin.), 9th (Chi), 13th (Atl) and 14th (Sea) ranked defenses so far.

Falcons and Bengals in particular have gotten after QB's (each rank 3rd with 12) which is usually GB's offensive achilles heal. That's proven out so far this year as well. Rodgers was sacked 13 times in their 3 worst point producing games and only twice when they racked up 35 on the Bears.

With Guards playing Tackle and UDFA rookies starting on the o-line, I'd say the offense has done pretty well getting in the end zone and should only get better.

They've been particularly good in the most important situations that drive point production - #1 in the league in Red Zone TD % and #3 in 3rd Down Conversion Rate. They'll win a lot of games if they keep up that situational production - and the defense continues to hold up.

Individually, I tend to agree with you about Adams from a contract standpoint. He's a good possession guy who can get off the line and fight for balls but a complimentary guy who is fortunate to fit the Packers' and Rodgers' game pretty well. If someone wants to pay up for him like the Vikes did for Jennings, he could easily fall of the cliff harder and faster than Jennings did post-GB.

Rodgers and the Packers scheme spreads the ball around so much by knowing defensive tendencies, matchups and attacking what the defense gives them rather than targeting any of their guys like most teams do with their 1's, so it can be tough to judge individual production. That said, Football Outsiders has Nelson as the #2 ranked receiver in the league right now. Cobb is #22 and Adams is #24. A couple teams (Rams and Vikes) have their top 2 guys higher than GB's top 2, but no one matches GB's top 3.No fair, Vince! Making points by relying on facts is no fair to us seat-of-the-pantsers!! :wink::smile:

[mraynrand]

Rodgers does like to often wait and see if he can make the bigger play and passes on throwing to the open player underneath. I also think Bennett's numbers will improve once our starting tackles are back and he doesn't have to block as much.

I agree. The problems with the O line explain a lot. Much like Rodgers gets comfortable with his top receiver (Jennings, Nelson), knowing each other's nuances, the same could be said for Rodgers and Bacteria - Rodgers moves in the pocket in a particular way, and Bac often can play cat and mouse with the pass rusher, just keeping him at bay while Rodgers moves around back there. The fill-in guys have either been incompetent (Murphy, Spriggs) or more conventional (Taybor™), but none have been as athletic as Bac and allowed for those 'extended pockets' that are such a feature of the Rodgers-led offense. The way that Rodgers-Bakhtiari relationship works is really an art form.

[pbmax]

vince,

Can you post the personnel numbers for 2015? The 2016 numbers featured an offense without its best TE, so McCarthy was using other formations. Injuries certainly played a role in the drought, it was not just game plans and personnel groups.

During run the table, Cook was back and getting increasingly healthy. He was operating in the middle of the field, against the middle of the defense. Even if he is running a crossing route (like his catch versus the Cowboys in the playoffs) that is threatening the middle of the D, even if the play was extended and the throw was from outside the hash to outside the hash. He was bracketed by a LB and a safety (or nickel CB) I believe.

As I recall, prior to Giants and McAdoo, it was the Packers leading the lead in 11 personnel.

[pbmax]

He may be using more stacks and bunches but I found no empirical evidence to support that.

I would bet a significant sum on that this year. He went to it a bit last year during run the table, but its been a regular feature this year. He's put as many as four skill position players in a bunch. He runs from this as well.

[pbmax]

those directional numbers don't look all that different to me, but there are no confidence intervals so what can I say

I think those are a combo of Rodgers preference and M3 play calling, which over time has been influenced by Rodgers preference.

[pbmax]

This turn around has had more to do with McCarthy tightening up the leash (slightly and often temporarily depending on offensive flow) on Rodgers inclination to improvise and the receivers' ability to separate quickly vs. man coverage than any "creativity" he gained, or lack of it previously. He's a creative offensive mind, which was partially what caused some problems during the drought. The innovative "second level" attack is his brainchild, but like all innovations, there are often bumps in the road and adjustments to be made.

Rodgers and the whole offense benefits from some structure early, and then he can open up the second level attack once they get things going. The full arsenal of healthy receivers makes all the difference too.

I think this is true for this year with a banged up O line and featuring quicker throws. The Packers are near the top of the League in throws under 5 yards.

But I suspect that with Tackle health, Rodgers will have his freedom back. I don't think McCarthy works against that, I think he encourages it unless its going to get him killed because of 4 Guards on the O line.

[pbmax]

Agreed, which indicates that some mythical middle of the field attack change not only didn't impact the turnaround, but didn't exist in the first place.

I don't see how you can watch last year's offense with Cook and not say he is not attacking the middle of the field (and the defense). He wasn't lined up on the boundary.

This year they are running combos with Cobb and Bennett to shake Cobb open in the middle.

Have the total number of plays to the middle gone up? Probably not, they still prefer to attack the edges. But I think that red zone and 3rd down rankings reflect their play.

[pbmax]

So you're concluding, PB, that MM has worked his way out of that slump he was in?

Whew. I was tired of him trying to grit his teeth and force things. Great coaches roll with what they're given.

After the first pass through vince's numbers, I think McCarthy still does not change his play approach until there simply is no other choice. We have discussed that as a strength before and it is, because it helps the team perform at a high level and plug players in when the inevitable injuries strike. A consistent and simpler playbook works for more situations in today's NFL.

Rodgers helps him make this approach work by being able to operate well pre-snap, with audibles and extending plays. But even with Nelson, Cobb, Jones and a hole at TE, the offense struggled at times to get open against man even in 2014*.

So there is a limit. With Nelson hurt or recovering, being without a TE threat or a banged up Cobb, you have Rand's situation, where the players available need scheme help because the skill position talent aren't winning one on one. Adams and perhaps Allison are the exciting possible exceptions here.

Something I did not consider while writing this is that McCarthy, rather than redo his offense with scheme for basic plays this year, has redone his situational offense instead. So red zone and 3rd down as looking good so far, though we are in for a film adjustment period soon as D coordinators will have the full four weeks of film to review of the new offense starting this week.

The other thing is the TEs. They go 3 deep, each has some skill as a receiver Rodger's trusts, but all of them can block. Which really puts pressure on a D.



* The games versus Seattle (obviously great D), Detroit in Detroit and Buffalo (possibly one of the worst O games of M3/Rodgers career versus a great D on the road) come to mind. And games versus Fangio and the great 49er D during Harbaugh's tenure. Many of these games though were on the road though, which makes a discernible to the naked eye difference in the Packers pass protection.

Though I accept no excuses for the O's performance versus San Fran in the home playoff game in 2013. Seriously, the Defense stood up despite losing a corner and OLB in the first quarter and held. The Packer O at home was mediocre. On the other hand, the 2014 Offense lead the league in scoring. So we are talking about only a handful of plays. Problem is, several of them have been in the playoffs.

[red]

so, if tubby mcfatty didn't have #12, this is a 0-4 team

that seems about right

[mraynrand]

so, if tubby mcfatty didn't have #12, this is a 0-4 team

that seems about right

yawn

[mraynrand]

I don't see how you can watch last year's offense with Cook and not say he is not attacking the middle of the field (and the defense). He wasn't lined up on the boundary.

It just wasn't that many plays. 30 to Cook, 30 to Rodgers (and he caught a lot of those outside). Even Cook's most celebrated catch counts as an outside catch! 2015 Numbers are 58 for Rodgers and 11 for Perillo - and the total yards are pretty close to the same.

I do think that there was some influence with Cook in there, but not a ton.

[pbmax]

It just wasn't that many plays. 30 to Cook, 30 to Rodgers (and he caught a lot of those outside). Even Cook's most celebrated catch counts as an outside catch! 2015 Numbers are 58 for Rodgers and 11 for Perillo - and the total yards are pretty close to the same.

I do think that there was some influence with Cook in there, but not a ton.

30 catches on 51 targets though, and that was 5 starts and 10 games. And his return clearly sparked the offense.

Disregarding the semantic hole we are in danger of falling down, given where Cook and Rodgers lined up, they were covered by middle of the field defenders. Defenses weren't putting the #1 or #2 CB on them. They were covered by combinations of slot corners, safeties and linebackers.

And Cook's crossing routes did attack the center of the field. It is true also though, that his #1 route, especially early, was an flat/out. But remember, even on that route, he as pulling a slot corner with him.

But I am not trying to argue he changed his entire offense, I think his changes were modest. But he did need an infusion of matchup problems.

[pbmax]

so, if tubby mcfatty didn't have #12, this is a 0-4 team

that seems about right

No, if he had Alex Smith his offense would look very different. It looked different when he had Favre.

[vince]

I don't see how you can watch last year's offense with Cook and not say he is not attacking the middle of the field (and the defense). He wasn't lined up on the boundary.

This year they are running combos with Cobb and Bennett to shake Cobb open in the middle.

Have the total number of plays to the middle gone up? Probably not, they still prefer to attack the edges. But I think that red zone and 3rd down rankings reflect their play.

Regarding Cook and his Directional Play Frequency, I'm going by the objective data, not some vague statement(s) that tend to be developed to fit with an individual's narrative or understanding of reality. That said, if you want to include crossing routes from one side to the other outside boundary, that will even out over time. There's just nothing suggesting they changed their approach signficantly to attack the middle of the field upon their resurgence with Cook or someone else.


https://www.sharpfootballstats.com/directional-pass-frequency--off-.html

2016 Week 11-21 (Cook's Return from Injury and Roughly the Start of Offensive Resurgence)
TE Directional Play Frequency Distribution

Left - 40%
Middle - 18%
Right - 41%

Here are some (they don't have them all) of his routes charted by game.
Not definitive perhaps but I'd say informative. His route chart consistently (not exclusively) starts from TE position toward boundaries pretty consistently with the frequencies noted on the other data site.

https://nextgenstats.nfl.com/charts/player/jared-cook/COO152641/2016

https://charts-cdn-b.nextgenstats.nfl.com/static-charts/900/route-chart_COO152641_2016-post-20.jpeg
4 from right to left outside - 2 complete for 16 yds.
1 from right to middle - 0 complete for 0 yds.
0 from left to middle
1 from left to right outside - 1 complete for 18 yds.
3 left to left outside - 1 complete for TD 6 yds.
5 right to right outside - 4 complete for 56 yds.

https://charts-cdn-b.nextgenstats.nfl.com/static-charts/900/route-chart_COO152641_2016-post-19.jpeg
1 from right to left outside - 1 complete for 35 yds.
1 from right to middle - 0 complete for 0 yds.
0 from left to middle - 0 complete for 0 yds.
1 from left to right outside - 1 complete for 18 yds.
2 left to left outside - 0 complete for 0 yds.
7 right to right outside - 4 complete for 61 yds. and TD

https://charts-cdn-a.nextgenstats.nfl.com/static-charts/900/route-chart_COO152641_2016-reg-11.jpeg
0 from right to left outside - 0 complete for 0 yds.
1 from right to middle - 0 complete for 0 yds.
1 from left to middle - 0 complete for 0 yds.
1 from left to right outside - 0 complete for 0 yds.
6 left to left outside - 3 complete for 48 yds. and TD
2 right to right outside - 2 complete for 57 yds.

Totals for 3 games featured
5 from right to left outside - 3 complete for 51 yds.
3 from right to middle - 0 complete for 0 yds.
1 from left to middle - 0 complete for 0 yds.
2 from left to right outside - 2 complete for 36 yds.
11 left to left outside - 4 complete for 54 yds. and 2 TD
14 right to right outside - 10 complete for 174 yds. and TD

[pbmax]

In those three games, I count 4 catches from the traditional TE spot or perhaps slot/wing, in the middle third of the field.

He might be headed left or right, but those routes traverse and are defended by interior defenders. I'd be curious the effect this had on Cobb and Monty's catches.

One thing they did not do with Cook, which surprised me even last year with his speed and height, was attack deep down the middle. His most common route was that flat route he ran while the WR ran a slant. McCarthy is still using that this year to get the ball out quickly.

[pbmax]

The remaining problems are running the ball (the best way to get a team out of Cover 2) and the deep ball.

The O line health status doesn't help there.

[red]

yawn

you're still here?

i thought you quit the packers for good when they started allowing blacks to think?

[mraynrand]

you're still here?

i thought you quit the packers for good when they started allowing blacks to think?

man are you a tool. Come over and debate in FYI if you have any balls.

[vince]

In those three games, I count 4 catches from the traditional TE spot or perhaps slot/wing, in the middle third of the field.

He might be headed left or right, but those routes traverse and are defended by interior defenders. I'd be curious the effect this had on Cobb and Monty's catches.

One thing they did not do with Cook, which surprised me even last year with his speed and height, was attack deep down the middle. His most common route was that flat route he ran while the WR ran a slant. McCarthy is still using that this year to get the ball out quickly.
Right I missed the run after catch on those. But even if we assume that they increased their middle of the field attack when they got their receiving TE back (The data I've seen still doesn't support any change to that effect. If anything it's slightly the opposite.) I don't see how that constitutes some kind of epiphany on McCarthy's part to become more creative and varied with playcalling and/or personnel groupings.

McCarthy said right from the start when Cook was signed that a TE who can attack the middle of the field is important and he brings that. So we all agree the threat is important. I also agree that it's interesting that they (with Cook at least) didn't actually do it more, perhaps because they continued to have far lower production when they did. It depends on defensive schemes and tendencies. Teams whose coverage schemes demand their inside backers to track receivers down the deep middle are soft there, but the Tampa 2 scheme where the deep safeties play wide and that's a key component isn't featured much throughout the league any more. 2 deep safety nickel and dime defenses where there's a guy on each hash 10 yards off the ball covering the seams from the get-go and a defender head up on the TE at the line disrupting his release also tend to negate that.

This is consistent with how the Packers offensive scheme operates (and pretty much always has under McCarthy) to put players in the best position to succeed through preparation, planning and dynamically attacking the defense where they're weakest as opposed to some new creative "scheming" (in your words) for new and more combinations of players and formation so they can throw it to Cook down the middle more by design because he's pretty good. The latter just hasn't and doesn't happen - not since that blew up with Finley one of the many years he got hurt.

The former has always and continues to be their approach - with improvements/adjustments related to player health/available skill level, offensive play style, tempo, rhythm, etc. designed to take advantage of the unique skills and intelligence of their QB to first attack by plan with quick release and accuracy based on tendency, but then also with opportunities that creates for what they really want/need to win - to capitalize on their unique and highly effective competitive advantage - their QB's off-the-charts football IQ and his unprecedented ability to extend plays, see things before they're there - and deliver the ball downfield with velocity, accuracy, and timeliness.

Defenses adjusted to prevent all that. For awhile they succeeded (they still do to varying degrees) because 1) the Packers committed too much to their "second phase" attack right from the start of games before establishing the fast pace tempo and play style that they've found it needs to succeed, and 2) the Packers receivers were unsuccessful in separating from man coverage and/or the QB was more averse to throwing into tighter windows associated with shorter throws.

Then the Packers adjusted with simpler attack and emphasis on getting into rhythm to establish play style and speed up game tempo to their advantage and enable Rodgers to be more effective at the things he's uniquely good at. It's been strategic adjustments to overcome what defenses did to offset all that more than tactical adjustments to personnel groups, formations and/or the plays they run. Those change (or not) game to game based on opponent and how they think they can exploit the defensive scheme, match-ups, etc. they think they'll encounter as well as the status of their own lineup, player health, availability, strengths, exposures, etc.

Maybe McCarthy errs at times by overestimating his guys or expecting too much from them (not a bad flaw if you're a football coach), but it's not nor ever has been because of a lack of ability or willingness to "scheme". Sometimes injuries, experience and/or ability means the other guy wins. Notwithstanding the possibility of an elusive solution to injury trends that have impacted them in specific areas (as it relates to the scope of this thread), I think McCarthy is among the elites at getting his guys ready and putting them in the best position possible to succeed throughout the game.

[pbmax]

Right I missed the run after catch on those. But even if we assume that they increased their middle of the field attack when they got their receiving TE back (The data I've seen still doesn't support any change to that effect. If anything it's slightly the opposite.) I don't see how that constitutes some kind of epiphany on McCarthy's part to become more creative and varied with playcalling and/or personnel groupings.

McCarthy said right from the start when Cook was signed that a TE who can attack the middle of the field is important and he brings that. So we all agree the threat is important. I also agree that it's interesting that they (with Cook at least) didn't actually do it more, perhaps because they continued to have far lower production when they did. It depends on defensive schemes and tendencies.

1. I think from your numbers that the difference Cook made in 2016 were either routes that ran through the middle, and tied down interior defenders in a serious way (last 6 games Cook was very effective) or the mere presence of a physical specimen who was fast, tall and could catch. Given the results, I assume this is what McCarthy means when he says attack the middle of a D. Its not a scheme nor a pass play, its a general all purpose way to describe a player who can line up on the interior and be a threat in the pass game.

He did not, as the numbers and route maps show, do the majority of his damage with throws to the middle of the field.

So I agree McCarthy did not change the offense to feature different routes, or if he did, Rodgers did not throw to those spots. And so for the reason the TE attacking the middle seemed effective is still hard to pin down literally, but we can say two things about it now. The talent at TE is important if its going to work (and they need to be trusted by Rodgers) and by virtue of struggles before Cook, its important to stress the middle of the field in passing because the lesser pass defenders are there. Outside of Cook and Nelson, it wasn't happening during the drought.

I also think we can say that time in the pocket was important, as one of Cooks most common routes was the slant/flat combo, a safe and fast throw which serves about the same purpose as a dive into the line. It will get you 2-5 yards most of the time.


This is consistent with how the Packers offensive scheme operates (and pretty much always has under McCarthy) to put players in the best position to succeed through preparation, planning and dynamically attacking the defense where they're weakest as opposed to some new creative "scheming" (in your words) for new and more combinations of players and formation so they can throw it to Cook down the middle more by design because he's pretty good. The latter just hasn't and doesn't happen - not since that blew up with Finley one of the many years he got hurt.

Its clear now for two years that McCarthy has wanted better talent at TE. Whether he is throwing to the middle or attacking interior defenders in the pass game, there is something to this. We will get to the playbook in a second.


Defenses adjusted to prevent all that. For awhile they succeeded because 1) the Packers committed too much to their "second phase" attack right from the start of games before establishing the fast pace tempo and play style it needs to succeed, and 2) the Packers receivers were unsuccessful in separating from man coverage and/or the QB was more averse to throwing into tighter windows associated with shorter throws.

I agree with first point, but I think the 'won't throw into tight windows' thing is overrated. Rodgers passes up easy throws to the middle of the field sometimes (not just a recent thing with playbook changes) while waiting for something bigger and tougher to break open.


Then the Packers adjusted with simpler attack and emphasis on getting into rhythm to establish play style and speed up game tempo to their advantage and enable Rodgers to be more effective at the things he's uniquely good at.

I definitely agree with this and I think the shorter passing game has served two purposes; as you put it earlier, it a matchup and exploit option determined by opponent or health/ability of roster. It also serves as a check to the pass rush, which is why its been featured this year so much with injuries at Tackle. I am very intrigued by your idea that it also constrains Rodgers, because as this article (and this one) depict, he can still call his Rodger's Offense out there.


Maybe McCarthy errs at times by overestimating his guys or expecting too much from them (not a bad flaw if you're a football coach).

I agree that his belief in his guys is a net positive for the team.

But I think its indisputable McCarthy has changed his offense not only in a normal evolution, but after the CBA. He said he reduced volume to speed installation. He has claimed that modifying routes to scheme people open was going to cease. Receivers needed to win one on one.

Personnel group calls have also changed. Think back to the two year rollout of the no-huddle.

But one thing I ignored (as the original focus was about what was a compare contrast with M3 and McAdoo) was talent outside of the QB. 4 or 5 wides doesn't mean the same thing as they did during the Big 5 era (Jennings/Driver/Jones/Nelson/Martin-Finley). Maybe Allison and Adams step up and Cobb is back to his earlier, healthy level, but that hasn't been the case for a while now.

More TEs have been used in the past to diversify the offense and they seem to be committed to that direction now two years in a row.

But talent, as rand pointed out, is probably the biggest factor. And the lack of talent in his depth might have been the constraining factor to his offense as much as opposing defenses adjusting.

However whether due to injuries, retirements or talent drain, McCarthy has in three different years (Drought Year 1, 2 and 2017) changed his formations to get someone open early against man coverage after struggling mightily to do so earlier.

And that to me is also a strength. One McAdoo is struggling to match.

[mraynrand]

No, if he had Alex Smith his offense would look very different. It looked different when he had Favre.

I think Red assumes(he can feel free to correct me):

1. That Stubby has little to do with Rodger's success
2. That if and when Rodgers is permanently gone the Packers would stand pat with current QBs like Hundley as long term starter.

[mraynrand]

McAdoo does have OBJ who is like Jennings on steroids. They target him a bunch even though defenses do everything they can to take him away. Still he gets the rock less than 1/4 of the time.

If Packers have a talent problem NYG have it in spades. The have OBJ and a lot of crap/inexperience. And Manning may be permanently in the shitter (though his numbers are OK so far this year). But he's such a weird duck - he can play like absolute crap for long stretches and then light on fire. Weird group of guys to coach to be sure.

[pbmax]

McAdoo does have OBJ who is like Jennings on steroids. They target him a bunch even though defenses do everything they can to take him away. Still he gets the rock less than 1/4 of the time.

If Packers have a talent problem NYG have it in spades. The have OBJ and a lot of crap/inexperience. And Manning may be permanently in the shitter (though his numbers are OK so far this year). But he's such a weird duck - he can play like absolute crap for long stretches and then light on fire. Weird group of guys to coach to be sure.

And I think in any evaluation, talent is the first thing. You can only be moderately successful without it.

Coach and scheme are #2.

[pbmax]

Even deeper into the thicket? The Rodgers offense is alive and well.

Here are two stories about the play call for Cook's catch on 3rd down: http://www.espn.com/blog/green-bay-packers/post/_/id/36935/jared-cook-play-against-cowboys-was-a-first-for-packers-qb-aaron-rodgers

And Wilde's take: http://host.madison.com/wsj/sports/football/professional/packers-aaron-rodgers-drawn-up-in-the-dirt-play-vs/article_abc231e6-e529-55c3-8ec3-36ced1d3f455.html

[call_me_ishmael]

Well, Adams sure looked good today, so IDK. I'm still not sold, but he definitely looked good today.