Bobbles Offseason Position group breakdown: Quarterbacks

[bobblehead]

Ok, I plan on doing a position by position analysis over the next few weeks cuz I'm missing Packers football already.

What can go right: Lafleur gets Arod back into the flow of things, teaches him how to properly use RB's and TE's en route to another MVP season. We never even sniff Kizer or Boyle after preseason.

Kizer and Boyle show signs of true development in the offseason and preseason. We fall in love with Boyle so much that we dish Kizer for...anything.

What could go wrong: Arod simply never could throw a screen like Favre could and he hasn't utilized a zone busting TE yet. Maybe it wasn't all MM's fault and ARod simply doesn't look underneath...ever.

Maybe he proves that father time and the NFL grind has taken its toll on his body and he isn't the same QB anymore. His accuracy was REALLY bad at times last year. Concussions have to be a real fear at this point. And at times the hungry young ARod has shown signs of becoming the entitled complacent Favre towards the end.

Both Kizer and Boyle look like crap on a stick all offseason and preseason and give us no choice but to stick with ARod through anything as we have no future on the roster.

Bottom line: I'm very concerned that Rodgers isn't the same guy and I'm not convinced he has the hunger he once did. I do think he wasn't listening to MM anymore and one of them had to go...and we chose correctly. Often times I think both should be gone and its time to start over, but I am also a realist in that he gives us our best chance at an Owl any time soon.

Hopefully he gets the "I'll show fat Mike" attitude that favre did in turning in a couple of his best seasons with the Jets and Vikings. I'm praying he buys all in with LaFleur and we sneak one more title out of him before we have to try for a 3rd HOF QB in a row.

Kizer has never given me any good reason to believe he can be a quality starting NFL QB. Boyle is too young to assess accurately at this point.

[Bossman641]

Good take. I also worry about Rodgers utilizing the rb's and te's. Saw a pass chart of his and it was shocking how often he throws outside the hashmarks compared to the rest of the league. The NFL has made passing over the middle so much easier then ever before but we didn't take advantage whatsoever.

[Cheesehead Craig]

I think Kizer won't be on the team next year. I think they will actually spend $ on a backup that can at least complete a pass to someone on our own team.

[Pugger]

I really think hiring LaFleur will be just the elixir to get Rodgers back. Our new HC will intellectually challenge Rodgers and we all know how competitive AR is. I wouldn't mind it if we found a better backup than the 2 we have presently.

[texaspackerbacker]

A lot of good points in the posts above. I also wouldn't be surprised if Kizer is gone, but I doubt we bring in a vet - just maybe a 5th-7th rounder to compete with Boyle. I don't think it is a matter of "teaching" Rodgers so much as improving pass route designs and coaching receivers to do better in scramble situations. Also, just maybe the O Line improves with a new O Line coach - wouldn't that be nice, seeing Rodgers get something resembling Brady-level pass blocking? (I'm hoping against hope that the O Line problems are curable by coaching, not just poor quality personnel.)

I guess I was a little surprised to read about Rodgers throwing so much to the outside. That's even more impressive when combined with his fantastic record of not throwing interceptions.

[ND72]

I think Kizer won't be on the team next year. I think they will actually spend $ on a backup that can at least complete a pass to someone on our own team.

LaFleur coached at Notre Dame Kizer's redshirt freshman year. ;)

[pbmax]

I think two of bobble's concerns get addressed by coaching changes.

Packers didn't screen much in later years with Holmgren and Lewis, might have to do with D adjustments or the backs on the field. Sherman really emphasized it with his run game and as a pass rush deterrent and they got much, much better, even better than early Holmgren.

With time and attention paid to it, they will all improve again. Rodgers looked much more in tune with Jones by the second half of the season and Williams has been very good for awhile.

TEs in that video about McCarthy and Rodgers butting heads said that M3's offense did not feature a lot of TE routes. Not sure how the Shanahan offense likes its TEs, but the Titans loved Walker until he got hurt early in LaFleur's first year.

[bobblehead]

I think two of bobble's concerns get addressed by coaching changes.

Packers didn't screen much in later years with Holmgren and Lewis, might have to do with D adjustments or the backs on the field. Sherman really emphasized it with his run game and as a pass rush deterrent and they got much, much better, even better than early Holmgren.

With time and attention paid to it, they will all improve again. Rodgers looked much more in tune with Jones by the second half of the season and Williams has been very good for awhile.

TEs in that video about McCarthy and Rodgers butting heads said that M3's offense did not feature a lot of TE routes. Not sure how the Shanahan offense likes its TEs, but the Titans loved Walker until he got hurt early in LaFleur's first year.

I've been on record blaming MM before Arod for lack of screens and TE usage and I will maintain that view until proven wrong. Too many bubble screens to TEs for it not to be MMs fault. LaFleur's reputation is that he will be up on the modern usage of TE and RBs. I think I read something about separation on routes being pretty high for Tennessee last year, just that Marriota was epic levels of suckitude.

[bobblehead]

A lot of good points in the posts above. I also wouldn't be surprised if Kizer is gone, but I doubt we bring in a vet - just maybe a 5th-7th rounder to compete with Boyle. I don't think it is a matter of "teaching" Rodgers so much as improving pass route designs and coaching receivers to do better in scramble situations. Also, just maybe the O Line improves with a new O Line coach - wouldn't that be nice, seeing Rodgers get something resembling Brady-level pass blocking? (I'm hoping against hope that the O Line problems are curable by coaching, not just poor quality personnel.)

I guess I was a little surprised to read about Rodgers throwing so much to the outside. That's even more impressive when combined with his fantastic record of not throwing interceptions.

I think one of Kizer or Boyle is gone next year. Sadly its likely Boyle. I don't think the team will bail on Kizer just yet. If you just hired the young hotshot coach you should have his project readying himself. I can't even guess who that might be. Kizer because of pedigree and former connection? Boyle because of the flashes we all saw? Someone we draft late this year that LaFleur hand picks?

[mraynrand]

I think one of Kizer or Boyle is gone next year. Sadly its likely Boyle. I don't think the team will bail on Kizer just yet. If you just hired the young hotshot coach you should have his project readying himself. I can't even guess who that might be. Kizer because of pedigree and former connection? Boyle because of the flashes we all saw? Someone we draft late this year that LaFleur hand picks?

Almost certain they will bring in a rookie QB. Someone will fall to them and you should always be prepping the next guy. Kizer's hesitation, especially in red zone, may be incurable.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

While the Great Arm of Butte exhibited humble toughness last season, he ain't the Gunslinger tough. As insurance in case, God-forbid, Butte gets KIA (again), the Packers need to acquire an inspiring, experienced vet who has not only seen all the horrors of NFL wars, but one who has done it all as well.

Kap.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Also, just maybe the O Line improves with a new O Line coach - wouldn't that be nice, seeing Rodgers get something resembling Brady-level pass blocking? (I'm hoping against hope that the O Line problems are curable by coaching, not just poor quality personnel.)



Ole Tom gets rid of the rock so fast, he could have Spriggs, Murphy and Tony Moll blocking for him along with Deputy Nutz as their OL-coach, and he would still make 'em all look like leftist media-selected All-Pros.

[texaspackerbacker]

No, as a matter of fact, Brady is a fairly immobile throw-it-down-the-field kind of QB most of the time who has gotten fantastic protection. I absolutely would not want my team's QB - be it Rodgers, Brady, or somebody lesser - to unload it quick most of the time. That is a recipe for interceptions and losses. Sure, you gotta mix in a few quick slants or quick outs or that kind of WR screen that some in here seem to hate, just like you have a few running plays for change of pace, but you win games by throwing it down the field 10 or 15 yards and occasionally more. And if your pass protection ain't good, you buy time scrambling in order to throw it down the field.

[bobblehead]

No, as a matter of fact, Brady is a fairly immobile throw-it-down-the-field kind of QB most of the time who has gotten fantastic protection. I absolutely would not want my team's QB - be it Rodgers, Brady, or somebody lesser - to unload it quick most of the time. That is a recipe for interceptions and losses. Sure, you gotta mix in a few quick slants or quick outs or that kind of WR screen that some in here seem to hate, just like you have a few running plays for change of pace, but you win games by throwing it down the field 10 or 15 yards and occasionally more. And if your pass protection ain't good, you buy time scrambling in order to throw it down the field.

Are you watching Brady right now?

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Are you watching Brady right now?

What's up with Ole Tom? Ain't watching the game. Boycotting the NFL.

[texaspackerbacker]

no. Why, is he "getting rid of the rock quick"? His O Line this year hasn't been up to previous standards.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

No, as a matter of fact, Brady is a fairly immobile throw-it-down-the-field kind of QB most of the time who has gotten fantastic protection. I absolutely would not want my team's QB - be it Rodgers, Brady, or somebody lesser - to unload it quick most of the time. That is a recipe for interceptions and losses. Sure, you gotta mix in a few quick slants or quick outs or that kind of WR screen that some in here seem to hate, just like you have a few running plays for change of pace, but you win games by throwing it down the field 10 or 15 yards and occasionally more. And if your pass protection ain't good, you buy time scrambling in order to throw it down the field.

NE's offense is all about grinding proficiently. That means lots of quick passes - not saying that Brady can't bomb it (he can and does). J-Mac is a genius; he gets short, slow, white WRs, as well as midget RBs of all races, open quickly via the X's and O's. Doesn't hurt that he has the GOAT quarterbacking his offense.

[pbmax]

no. Why, is he "getting rid of the rock quick"? His O Line this year hasn't been up to previous standards.

They've scored three TDs before the mid way through the second and he hasn't help the ball longer than 3 seconds yet. Maybe on the sidelines when the defense is on the field.

[texaspackerbacker]

It must be nice to have an O Line that makes that possible instead of the QB needing to run for his life.

[mraynrand]

It must be nice to have an O Line that makes that possible instead of the QB needing to run for his life.

whut?

[gbgary]

Are you watching Brady right now?

brady was surgical. game was over midway thru the 2nd qtr. you play zone against ne at your own peril.

[pbmax]

brady was surgical. game was over midway thru the 2nd qtr. you play zone against ne at your own peril.

Seriously, whoever choose and whoever approved of that game plan should be fired for extended stupidity.

My dog knows you can't play a static old school zone against them.

[bobblehead]

It must be nice to have an O Line that makes that possible instead of the QB needing to run for his life.

Reading comprehension ain't your strong suit. Everyone who commented after my post understood (except you). The MM offense was stale and wrong in today's NFL. I really hope LaFlavor brings in this style.

Look at who is left standing. NE, NO, LA, KC.

What do they all have in common? A RB who can catch the ball out of the backfield and do something electric. What did we have? A coach who threw a hissy fit and traded a RB who came into the league as a WR which was probably a good choice since he had no clue how to use him and adapt to what is working now.

[texaspackerbacker]

That was so long ago it's hard to tell which post of yours you were even talking about. My comment you quoted here was not even in response to you but to pbmax's thing about Brady.

As for the 4 teams left, I suppose they have a lot of things in common - top level QBs at the top of the list, although none of those (or anybody else in the world) are quite up to the Aaron Rodgers level. Who doesn't have "A RB who can catch the ball out of the backfield and do something electric"? You don't think Aaron Jones (or even Jamal Williams for that matter) fits that description?

[Pugger]

One thing that Brady does is he gets that ball out of there quickly before the defense can get anywhere near him. If MLF can get Rodgers to emulate that perhaps Rodgers won't get so banged up.

[pbmax]

One thing that Brady does is he gets that ball out of there quickly before the defense can get anywhere near him. If MLF can get Rodgers to emulate that perhaps Rodgers won't get so banged up.

Well, see now Pugger, this is where you and the rest of the board are confused.

As tex has amply demonstrated with video clips and clear headed explainers, a QB who stands in the pocket and delivers the ball in less than 3 seconds is by definition benefitting from exceptional pass protection.

Rogers dancing in the pocket for 5+ seconds and having to avoid rushers is suffering from poor pass protection.

QED

[Fritz]

One thing that Brady does is he gets that ball out of there quickly before the defense can get anywhere near him. If MLF can get Rodgers to emulate that perhaps Rodgers won't get so banged up.

If we can figure out a way to get an "I" between that "M" and "L" we'll have a MILF for a coach.

[texaspackerbacker]

Well, see now Pugger, this is where you and the rest of the board are confused.

As tex has amply demonstrated with video clips and clear headed explainers, a QB who stands in the pocket and delivers the ball in less than 3 seconds is by definition benefitting from exceptional pass protection.

Rogers dancing in the pocket for 5+ seconds and having to avoid rushers is suffering from poor pass protection.

QED

There are plenty of QBs around who do exactly as ya'all wish Aaron Rodgers would do. I wouldn't trade Aaron Rodgers for ANY of them; Who among you would?

Rush to get rid of the ball quick and you inevitably get interceptions, not to mention a lot of short gains that are no better than running plays. Speaking of poor pass protection, WHEN did Aaron Rodgers EVER consistently get 3 seconds, even 2.5 seconds of a clean pocket - as Brady and really MOST QBs expect and get almost all the time? Brady, as immobile as he is, wouldn't survive half a game playing behind the Packers O Line.

I'm not too disappointed that Aaron Rodgers opted out of the Pro Bowl, but about the only reason I was looking forward to seeing him there was to see exactly how good he would do with decent protection - which a Pro Bowl O Line plus favorable pass rush rules would have given him.

[pbmax]

There are plenty of QBs around who do exactly as ya'all wish Aaron Rodgers would do. I wouldn't trade Aaron Rodgers for ANY of them; Who among you would?

Rush to get rid of the ball quick and you inevitably get interceptions, not to mention a lot of short gains that are no better than running plays. Speaking of poor pass protection, WHEN did Aaron Rodgers EVER consistently get 3 seconds, even 2.5 seconds of a clean pocket - as Brady and really MOST QBs expect and get almost all the time? Brady, as immobile as he is, wouldn't survive half a game playing behind the Packers O Line.

I'm not too disappointed that Aaron Rodgers opted out of the Pro Bowl, but about the only reason I was looking forward to seeing him there was to see exactly how good he would do with decent protection - which a Pro Bowl O Line plus favorable pass rush rules would have given him.

I don't want any other QB at all. Except maybe a nice backup.

But we saw all this at work with Rodgers in 2008 and 2009 (briefly, til the Cowboy game). He wants something more than the defense is giving him. So he doesn't take the first read of the progression. He waits. Sure, sometimes that is coverage or a bad read, but especially now its him choosing to wait.

Its so ingrained in him he's done it on fourth down, late in a game they are trailing and gotten sacked.

I would absolutely trade a small increase in INTs for more quick passes, because that tradeoff is going to score the Packers more points because it will sustain drives. How many INTs did Brees or Brady have this year? Its certainly possible to be careful and quick. Rodgers can read a D like no one's business.

Think back to the drive versus the Steelers that ended in Jennings TD catch between Polamalu and Clark. That is the kind of quick, on rhythm throwing he needs to get back. They can still do extended offense when they need to, but it doesn't have to be the default offense on 3rd and 1.

[mraynrand]

Think back to the drive versus the Steelers that ended in Jennings TD catch between Polamalu and Clark.

Actually he should have thrown that to Nelson, who was more open. Still, there were a lot of times when that quick, deep vertical game was devastating.

BTW, I clicked on the Steelers-Packers game from last year on my DVR last night. That game-tying drive at the end of the game was probably one of Stubby's greatest game-calling sequences. The whole game really was well designed and called. Shame they lost. Stubby is a good coach. Some team is gonna be happy they sign him up. OK, that's it for Stubby/Steelers talk for me.

[pbmax]

Actually he should have thrown that to Nelson, who was more open. Still, there were a lot of times when that quick, deep vertical game was devastating.

BTW, I clicked on the Steelers-Packers game from last year on my DVR last night. That game-tying drive at the end of the game was probably one of Stubby's greatest game-calling sequences. The whole game really was well designed and called. Shame they lost. Stubby is a good coach. Some team is gonna be happy they sign him up. OK, that's it for Stubby/Steelers talk for me.

When he felt threatened by the opponent or venue, he could do a what of a job. But he could be this far too complacent of a figure too much of the time. And THAT guy got positively Schottenhiemerian when it came to crunch time.

[pbmax]

Actually he should have thrown that to Nelson, who was more open. Still, there were a lot of times when that quick, deep vertical game was devastating.

BTW, I clicked on the Steelers-Packers game from last year on my DVR last night. That game-tying drive at the end of the game was probably one of Stubby's greatest game-calling sequences. The whole game really was well designed and called. Shame they lost. Stubby is a good coach. Some team is gonna be happy they sign him up. OK, that's it for Stubby/Steelers talk for me.

The success of the vertical sideline passing game probably cut Jennings time with the Packers down by a year or two.

[texaspackerbacker]

I don't want any other QB at all. Except maybe a nice backup.

But we saw all this at work with Rodgers in 2008 and 2009 (briefly, til the Cowboy game). He wants something more than the defense is giving him. So he doesn't take the first read of the progression. He waits. Sure, sometimes that is coverage or a bad read, but especially now its him choosing to wait.

Its so ingrained in him he's done it on fourth down, late in a game they are trailing and gotten sacked.

I would absolutely trade a small increase in INTs for more quick passes, because that tradeoff is going to score the Packers more points because it will sustain drives. How many INTs did Brees or Brady have this year? Its certainly possible to be careful and quick. Rodgers can read a D like no one's business.

Think back to the drive versus the Steelers that ended in Jennings TD catch between Polamalu and Clark. That is the kind of quick, on rhythm throwing he needs to get back. They can still do extended offense when they need to, but it doesn't have to be the default offense on 3rd and 1.

I have nothing against a few of those "quick, on rhythm" throws being mixed in, just as they should mix in an occasional run play for change of pace. But I want a down-the-field throwing game to be the default setting. And given the poor pass protection, that quick passing game becomes even more of a risk for interceptions than otherwise. Going back to guys like Randall Cunningham, and even all the way back to Fran Tarkenton, I have always preferred a mobile QB avoiding the pass rush and throwing it down the field - not necessarily a 40 yard bomb for a TD every time, but some kind of a pass for a first down - 10, 15, 20 yards at least. What are the odds of that failing 3 times in a row and needing to punt? Not nearly as likely as wasting a down with a first down run or throwing short then ending up with 3rd and any amount needed to avoid a punt. Point being, if the goal is sustaining drives, that quick short passing game or even worse, a run-first offense just isn't as good.

Maybe you guys will get what you crave having a new coach mess with what Aaron Rodgers does; I sincerely hope not, as things would be a helluva lot worse that way IMO.

Brady had 11 interceptions and 37 for the last five years. Brees had just 5 this year, but 56 for the last five years. Aaron Rodgers had just 2, of course, and 28 for the past five seasons. I sure as hell know which one I will take. Yeah, it's possible to be "careful and quick", but it's more difficult and more risky.

[mraynrand]

When he felt threatened by the opponent or venue, he could do a what of a job. But he could be this far too complacent of a figure too much of the time. And THAT guy got positively Schottenhiemerian when it came to crunch time.

Do you think he'll take some time to reflect and self-scout - or allow someone else to scout and critique him? Would be interesting. I'd volunteer, but I don't think he'd listen to me.

"Schottenhiemerian" - This word deserves to be in the lexicon.

[pbmax]

Do you think he'll take some time to reflect and self-scout - or allow someone else to scout and critique him? Would be interesting. I'd volunteer, but I don't think he'd listen to me.

"Schottenhiemerian" - This word deserves to be in the lexicon.

Honestly? I don't think so. I don't think he is that curious or analytical. He seems entirely motivated by what his weekly game planning session tells him after the film review.

His last big adjustment was to the no huddle. I suspect that was a reaction to the slowdown his offense faced versus teams with such a good pass rush that the team couldn't get to its core game plan of attacking wide.

But the no huddle was very reliant on Rodgers bailing it out at times with free plays and 12 men calls. I am not sure it ever really increased his plays per game numbers, which could wear out a pass rush.

Conversely, he might adapt given that his next QB will probably not be as accomplished at bailing out the plan. It might reinvigorate him. He could do it with Flynn and he took baby steps with Hundley. But I would bet more of the same.

[bobblehead]

There are plenty of QBs around who do exactly as ya'all wish Aaron Rodgers would do. I wouldn't trade Aaron Rodgers for ANY of them; Who among you would?

Rush to get rid of the ball quick and you inevitably get interceptions, not to mention a lot of short gains that are no better than running plays. Speaking of poor pass protection, WHEN did Aaron Rodgers EVER consistently get 3 seconds, even 2.5 seconds of a clean pocket - as Brady and really MOST QBs expect and get almost all the time? Brady, as immobile as he is, wouldn't survive half a game playing behind the Packers O Line.

I'm not too disappointed that Aaron Rodgers opted out of the Pro Bowl, but about the only reason I was looking forward to seeing him there was to see exactly how good he would do with decent protection - which a Pro Bowl O Line plus favorable pass rush rules would have given him.

Let me name a few who get rid of the ball much quicker than rodgers. Brady, Maholmes, Brees, Goff. What do they all have in common...its escaping me.

[bobblehead]

I don't want any other QB at all. Except maybe a nice backup.

But we saw all this at work with Rodgers in 2008 and 2009 (briefly, til the Cowboy game). He wants something more than the defense is giving him. So he doesn't take the first read of the progression. He waits. Sure, sometimes that is coverage or a bad read, but especially now its him choosing to wait.

Its so ingrained in him he's done it on fourth down, late in a game they are trailing and gotten sacked.

I would absolutely trade a small increase in INTs for more quick passes, because that tradeoff is going to score the Packers more points because it will sustain drives. How many INTs did Brees or Brady have this year? Its certainly possible to be careful and quick. Rodgers can read a D like no one's business.

Think back to the drive versus the Steelers that ended in Jennings TD catch between Polamalu and Clark. That is the kind of quick, on rhythm throwing he needs to get back. They can still do extended offense when they need to, but it doesn't have to be the default offense on 3rd and 1.

It also keeps your defense off the field and rested...and the opposing offense off the field and out of rhythm.

[Pugger]

Well, see now Pugger, this is where you and the rest of the board are confused.

As tex has amply demonstrated with video clips and clear headed explainers, a QB who stands in the pocket and delivers the ball in less than 3 seconds is by definition benefitting from exceptional pass protection.

Rogers dancing in the pocket for 5+ seconds and having to avoid rushers is suffering from poor pass protection.

QED

I don't think our OL was as poor at pass pro as you are suggesting - when healthy. I suspect a lot of the times Rodgers is dancing around after a few seconds is because either he isn't seeing/ignoring open players underneath and/or our receivers are not getting open down field or coming back to AR when the play breaks down. OL can't hold 'em off forever.

[pbmax]

I don't think our OL was as poor at pass pro as you are suggesting - when healthy. I suspect a lot of the times Rodgers is dancing around after a few seconds is because either he isn't seeing/ignoring open players underneath and/or our receivers are not getting open down field or coming back to AR when the play breaks down. OL can't hold 'em off forever.

:lol:

I am not suggesting this. Tex is.

[texaspackerbacker]

:lol:

I am not suggesting this. Tex is.

Damn Straight!

[Pugger]

:lol:

I am not suggesting this. Tex is.

If AR was ignoring open guys underneath that's on him. If receivers are not getting open or coming back to AR when the play goes to hell that's on them and the WR coach. I suspect all of them were to blame for our offensive issues last year along with Stubby.

[bobblehead]

Again, not much different from my initial analysis. I started with the 2 positions that I expected to be pretty much the same for a reason. Now onto more fun discussions.

[bobblehead]

One thing that Brady does is he gets that ball out of there quickly before the defense can get anywhere near him. If MLF can get Rodgers to emulate that perhaps Rodgers won't get so banged up.

An effective run game that isn't 100% telegraphed will help with that a lot as well.

[texaspackerbacker]

As it has been for a long time with the Packers, the running game is anything but telegraphed. It is - and arguably should be - the rare exception, set up by a steady diet of passes. I, for one, hope it continues that way. Yeah yeah yeah, LaFleur has his new offense. However, a good coach adapts his schemes to personnel, not forcing something new that goes against the grain of the personnel. I expect to see a few noticeable changes in the type of running plays and maybe a few new wrinkles in the passing game too, but I absolutely don't expect the Packers to go all in for run-first - I damn well hope not. I expect the Packers in general and Aaron Rodgers in particular to have a great offensive season. Combine that with the best D money can buy, and it should be fun year.

[run pMc]

I prefer a quick rhythm passing game. They have some players who can run after the catch, plus I think it's a good way to help jumpstart your offense and especially your QB. Once you have that going a little bit and the opposing CBs get tempted to creep up on the route you can go more vertical. I'd think a player like MVS or EQ with their size/speed and a full step on a CB who had to recover and catch up could be scary for a DC.

As mentioned the quick passing game also protects your QB and makes your OL look better. A healthy Rodgers with a clean jersey usually leads to good things.

I don't think you can do it all the time though -- defenses will eventually press/bump and wreck the timing or jump the routes.

[texaspackerbacker]

I like a lot of what you say a lot of the time, run pMc, but the thing I don't like about the "quick rhythm passing game" that so many in here seem to want is that it seems like it goes against the grain of the best thing about Aaron Rodgers - not throwing interceptions. I'm confident, though, that whatever is called, Rodgers is gonna do what Rodgers is gonna do - extend plays and make plays with both his arm and his legs.

[pbmax]

If AR was ignoring open guys underneath that's on him. If receivers are not getting open or coming back to AR when the play goes to hell that's on them and the WR coach. I suspect all of them were to blame for our offensive issues last year along with Stubby.

I think the offense devolved over time to shorter routes. Personnel played a role here. Recall the difficulty the offense had when Jordy was injured. Worked OK for a while, but then the wheels started to come off. Only Cook and the extended offense saved them in 2016.

Without Cook and a hampered Nelson, there wasn't much left to get deep. Those offensive slowdowns in 2014 and 2015 became the offense.

To compensate, Rodgers accelerates changing the plays. Like Favre, he would ignore the basic play or half the field on initial reads looking for something bigger he remembered working against that defense previously.

You add that to WR injuries, limitations, lack of a TE and youth, you get a hodge podge of an offense. And yes, some guys were overlooked short even when open.

[run pMc]

I like a lot of what you say a lot of the time, run pMc, but the thing I don't like about the "quick rhythm passing game" that so many in here seem to want is that it seems like it goes against the grain of the best thing about Aaron Rodgers - not throwing interceptions. I'm confident, though, that whatever is called, Rodgers is gonna do what Rodgers is gonna do - extend plays and make plays with both his arm and his legs.

Agree that Rodgers is gonna improvise. Going back and watching what happened with the Rams vs. the Bears during regular season and Patriots in the SB, Goff looked flustered. I think Rodgers is smarter and more mobile, and would find ways to improvise that Goff couldn't when defenses take away the quick game or first reads.

One thing that we rarely saw last year (maybe teams caught up to it) was Rodgers getting defensive "12 men on the field" or "offside" free-plays. They will still need to take deep shots -- and with a room of speedy giant WRs they should. I loathed seeing them take (and miss) deep shots on 3rd and 3 under M3, but if it's there you take it.

[mraynrand]

Agree that Rodgers is gonna improvise. Going back and watching what happened with the Rams vs. the Bears during regular season and Patriots in the SB, Goff looked flustered. I think Rodgers is smarter and more mobile, and would find ways to improvise that Goff couldn't when defenses take away the quick game or first reads.

Those down on Stubby may not enjoy the fact that he's one of the coaches 'Cheat actually fears. Circumstances have typically been bad for the Packers when they faced 'Cheat while Stubby was coach, but there's no doubt but that Stubby could counter 'Cheat's defensive schemes. The Giants robbed us of two Superbowls that I think would have both been epic scoring fests. OH well. Anyway, hopefully L.A.Flour can fully utilize Rodgers and become greater than similarly designed offenses.