PDA

View Full Version : Inside the mind of a gunslinger



HarveyWallbangers
09-08-2007, 11:33 PM
Great article by McGinn. Everybody who thinks that Favre has just winged it his whole career should read this.


Favre reveals mental process behind directing the offense
By BOB McGINN

Green Bay - In Brett Favre's young world, there was no such thing as progression reads, passing trees or spreading the field.

"We were a backwoods country high school," Favre said, harkening back to his youth at Hancock North Central in the Mississippi bayou.

"My dad ran wishbone and wing-T. Seven on seven? I never even heard of that.

"Never heard of curl and flat. I could throw it through a damn wall but I was never taught to read the safety and here's your hot."

Even at Southern Mississippi, the passing game was far from sophisticated.

"It was triangle read to the strong side or triangle read over the ball," he remembered in an interview last month. "It was 1, 2, 3. My first real schooling was when I got traded here."

These days, aspiring teenage quarterbacks go to summer football camps in which more information is dispensed than Favre even knew existed at a similar age.

"I was so far behind," he said. "I learned on the fly. I'm still learning. You have to keep your channels open that way."

Of all the head coaches and position coaches Favre has had in Green Bay, Favre didn't have to even think twice when asked who was his most demanding taskmaster.

"I saw Mike Holmgren the other night," he said. "I said, 'There's no way I'd still be here today without you.' I used to hear Mike saying all the time, 'Just run it the way we coach it.' He'd say, 'Run it the way we're doing it. Run it the way we're doing it. Then, if it breaks down, let it happen.' "

Favre was thrust kicking and screaming into a precise system of offense predicated on the quarterback's ability to scan the field quickly from one receiver to another. Back then, the West Coast passing game usually incorporated all five receivers, opening up the entire field for attack and reducing pass coverage into a series of one-on-one matchups.

In his first three seasons, Favre fixated on his all-pro flanker, Sterling Sharpe. As his career unfolded and the team added more weapons, Favre used his near-photographic memory and increasing interest in the finer points of quarterbacking to become much more than just an unbridled gunslinger.

Today, the bedrock principles of the Packers' passing game under Mike McCarthy remain much the same as they were under Holmgren and later Mike Sherman. The growing complexity of defenses has doubled the demands on the quarterback before the ball is snapped, according to Favre. After that, the rate of success for most passes comes down to the passer going through his progression, then throwing on target and on time to the most open receiver.

All the Packers' pass plays break down into three categories:

1. Pure progression: The quarterback moves from his primary target all the way to his fourth or fifth target, if applicable.

2. Progression with an option: The quarterback has first, second and third reads. However, he usually has an option to throw to the back-side receiver if coverage permits.

3. Pre-snap look: The quarterback usually has mirrored routes, meaning the two receivers on the left and the two on the right run almost identical patterns. Assuming it's either Cover 2 (two safeties deep) or Cover 3 (one safety deep), the ball goes to the side best suited to beat the coverage.

Now, anyone who has ever witnessed Favre's inimitable style would be able to predict the inevitable questions regarding his career as one of the game's most illustrious quarterbacks.

Is progression really necessary? Is progression overrated? At what point should a quarterback just react?

"If you're coaching, you've got to have a starting point," Favre replied. "I think it's always important. But one of the most overlooked assets a player can have is instincts and reaction. At some point, as a coach or as a player, you say, 'Yeah, this is your read. Here's 1 and 2 and 3. But if you complete it to 3 without looking at 1 or 2, and it's a touchdown, I can't argue with you.'

"Whatever sport it is, the game either comes natural or it doesn't. Yeah, you can study. Yeah, someone can train you. But sometimes you've just got to throw caution to the wind and go play."

Favre's ability to make something from nothing, perhaps more than anything else, enabled him to reach legendary status. But his impatience with the designed progression also has left him four shy of the all-time record for interceptions.

His incredible memory, Favre maintains, has led to more of his poor plays than any other factor. Having thrown just about every route against just about every coverage, in games or in practice, Favre knows that he often is guilty of rushing through his progression for a route that has been open in the past.

"If you called Mike Sherman and Mike Holmgren and asked them if most of Brett's bad plays were the result of going to 3 instead of 1 or 2, or whatever, not staying with the framework of the offense . . . ," Favre said, letting his thought dangle. "I think most of my bad plays in the latter part of my years with Mike Holmgren, and I know with Mike Sherman, were the result of seeing it so many times. I get so excited something will be there, I get overanxious and don't let it develop."

Against Jacksonville in the third exhibition game, Favre directed an 11-play, 76-yard drive in a flawless manner that would have made the modern innovator of the West Coast progression, the late Bill Walsh, swell with pride.

Using his amazing recall, Favre talked through his seven straight completions to seven different receivers, providing an unvarnished glimpse at how his mind works:

Bubba Franks, 25 yards: "First thing when I hear the play is, where's my weak spot? So I go up and see a potential problem. Protect just to make sure. I made a protection change and they came with a strong dog. I studied them all week and I knew by front there's a good tendency of that. We picked it up, which tells me it's going to be zone. On this type of blitz, their weakness is in the middle. I looked there (crossing route) but in my mind I was pretty sure Bubba would be the throw because they're bringing a dog and vacating the middle. I still went through the motions and Bubba comes wide-ass open. He was the second read."

Donald Lee, 20: "My thought was go on a quick count and maybe catch a corner out of place. They actually played four across. We ran a mirrored route with the tight end (Lee) on a middle read. If the middle of the field is closed, he runs a cross. If it's open, he takes it. If I like my matchups outside, I pick a side based on the tightest corner. If they're both bump-and-run, which one do you think is a better go runner? As I'm dropping back, I could just kind of see the middle of the field open. I just kind of looked off and the backers split and I put it on Donald. He was the third read."

Greg Jennings, 14: "That's basically a coverage-read play. It was two-deep, and you're reading the middle of the field. If the (middle) backer goes with the tight end, your first crosser either wins or doesn't get the ball. If he gets inside, that's who you throw to. If he doesn't, and the defender runs with him, then the outside guy (Jennings) comes in on a trail-crossing route. If Greg wins, he gets the ball. But I really couldn't see him at first and I drifted to the right just a little. Those big SOB's inside. Sure enough, he cleared. Greg probably was the second read."

Ruvell Martin, 5: "That was a run. They were coming with zero (all-out) blitz. I saw that. I went over the run without telling anyone and threw it quick. I had one-on-one outside."

Donald Driver, 4: "He's got a double read. The place where they were at their weakest was if he got inside of (Terry) Cousin. Of course, Cousin played him hard inside knowing that. It's either that side or a look that way. Donald probably could have run a better route. But based on our past history he was going to give me his numbers. I came back to him quick."

Brandon Miree, 2: "That was progression. If you got the flat (on third and 1), take it. If not, you go 1 to 2."

Brandon Jackson, 3: "That's a progression. He was No. 4 on that route."

In Detroit, offensive coordinator Mike Martz doesn't allow Jon Kitna to call an audible. When Martz coached in St. Louis, his goal was for Kurt Warner and Marc Bulger to function like machines.

It's quite possible that Favre couldn't have played for Martz. He will perform with discipline to a point, but robotic will never be Favre.

That's why his chemistry with Driver is so acute. Driver probably was less prepared, coming from Alcorn State with a track background, than Favre was out of Southern Miss. Even now, Favre marvels at Driver's improvisational skill.

With pass rushers streaking forward with shocking force, there isn't time for a quarterback to look twice for a wideout if he's getting re-directed initially by press coverage. But Favre does that all the time with Driver, and the second window perhaps has been the secret of their success.

"I get so mad at (receivers) when they say, 'Well, you told me it was a 12-yard hook,'" said Favre. "Yeah, but if you feel a defender jumping a route you've got to react to it. You can't be too mechanical. Donald's better when the play breaks down."

Now, for one of the only times in his career, the Packers appear to be asking Favre to play conservatively. In effect, McCarthy wants the defense to be in position to win the game.

The operative question now is simple: should adherence to the progression for Favre be more important than ever before?

"Based on how we think our defense will play, maybe there's more of a premium on taking what they give you," said Favre. "Check-downs and punts are OK. I'm well aware of that.

"But, I think I have to go in with the mentality of don't be overcautious. Because what's got me here is a certain way. I know I can't put us in jeopardy and all those things, but we don't want to lose a guy who is running right down the middle of the field or something because it's, like, 'Can't make a mistake, can't make a mistake.'

"I don't call it a dilemma. That's just the way it is. I think you still play the game."

From Kiln, Miss., to Green Bay, Brett Favre always has played the game his way.

RashanGary
09-08-2007, 11:52 PM
Great artical. McGinn has been a shiny star today. With the exception of his overly tough questions to McCarthy, he's been money.

esoxx
09-08-2007, 11:54 PM
McGinn's a great sports reporter and has won many respected awards.

MM & TT are big boys, they should be able to handle some hard ass questions. It's better than softballs.

McGinn knows his shit.

RashanGary
09-08-2007, 11:58 PM
McGinn's a great sports reporter and has won many respected awards.

MM & TT are big boys, they should be able to handle some hard ass questions. It's better than softballs.

McGinn knows his shit.

I understand what you are saying, but they are questions that are obviously going no where. I think you are more likely to get dirt by being nice and letting the coach ramble than you are by asking pointed questions. All he did was put McCarthy on guard with those.

We went over it. It had nothing to do with being too hard on the coach. It had everything to do with just not getting good info out of the questions becuase of the nature of the questions.

Bretsky
09-08-2007, 11:58 PM
Great artical. McGinn has been a shiny star today. With the exception of his overly tough questions to McCarthy, he's been money.


McGinn has always been outstanding

esoxx
09-09-2007, 12:05 AM
McGinn's a great sports reporter and has won many respected awards.

MM & TT are big boys, they should be able to handle some hard ass questions. It's better than softballs.

McGinn knows his shit.

I understand what you are saying, but they are questions that are obviously going no where. I think you are more likely to get dirt by being nice and letting the coach ramble than you are by asking pointed questions. All he did was put McCarthy on guard with those.

We went over it. It had nothing to do with being too hard on the coach. It had everything to do with just not getting good info out of the questions becuase of the nature of the questions.

That's his style. I hope you're not surprised.

He's been around for a while and has been the same way every year.

Go back and look at the interviews he did with Sherman and Wolf. Same way.

The insight you're seeking will be answered on the field anyhow. The rest is just "talk".

Get it?

HarveyWallbangers
09-09-2007, 12:14 AM
I agree with JH. You can ask tough questions without framing the questions like he has recently. It's like he's trying to prove he can ask the tough questions. The interview should never be about the interviewee. If it is, it's not a good interview. Anyways! McGinn has been and Christl was some of the best writers out there.

esoxx
09-09-2007, 12:21 AM
The point is, that's his style. I'm not saying it's a good way to go about it. But no one can say he's just loading up on MM. Frankly, it makes JH sound as though he's never heard of a McGinn interview b/4 the first game of the season, going back to Wolf.

Yeah, he's rough and frames his questions. He's been doing it for years.

Talk is nice but how cares.

The interview is on the eve of the season. Talk is cheap, however it's said.

Let's see what happens on the field.

vince
09-09-2007, 07:28 AM
Just this week, I've learned more about what makes Ted Thompson tick, who Mike McCarthy is as the leader of the Pack, and now the state of mind of Brett Favre than I have from the group of Packer writers in a long, long time. Congratulations to Bob McGinn and Jason Wilde in particular for their insightful, well-written articles.

I agree with Justin about McGinn's interview style, in particular as it pertains to his "Is there enough wisdom in the room?" interview of Thompson from a month ago or so. I didn't think the McCarthy interview was nearly as bad though. In fact, although he did stay stubbornly to his pre-interview drafted questions about McCarthy's contract, seemingly as an attempt to challenge the relationship McCarthy has with Thompson, he provided McCarthy a great opportunity to establish with us fans what his philosophy is regarding the business side of his position. McCarthy came out of that line of questioning smelling like roses - at least as I see it. His approach is EXACTLY what you would hope to see in a coach at this stage of his career. He has unflinching trust in the organization, and most importantly, in his own ability to make his contract a moot point through the team's performance on the field.

In this article, it's fun and very enlightening to be able to - through the writing of McGinn - sit down in a film session with Brett Favre and understand his approach to the game in general, but also his thought processes and decision-making as plays develop and he goes through his progressions. Well done!

And this probably belongs in the other thread, but to top it off, McGinn clearly demonstrated his trust in his own independent thinking and instincts with his analysis and prognostication about the team today. It would be easy - and many analysts are doing it - to look at the past, then look at sexy free agent signings and possibly a top-five draft pick that are supposed to fill big needs, then look at what the other "analysts" are saying, and regurgitate the same mindless drivel. These "analysts" take a superficial look at a team and basically project that history will repeat itself, with a couple minor, but eminently safe, adjustments made as a result of a headline signing.

Boys become men in this league, and significant growth happens from within each player in the first few years in the league. Those changes aren't hard to see year over year, but the analysts actually have to look with their own eyes and think with their own minds in order to actually see what's in front of them. McGinn has clearly done that, and he trusts what he sees.

McGinn didn't say, "The Packers had a non-descript off-season, and didn't do much to improve the team, but IF THIS happens, the Packers COULD be good." He says, "I think the Packers are going to be good because this is what I see, and therefore, I project this TO HAPPEN." That's the kind of analysis and prognostication I prefer to read.

It's been a great end of the week of perspective and insight for true Packer fans.

Let's hope it gets topped off today with a great win!

I project it will.

RashanGary
09-09-2007, 07:58 AM
Very well stated, Vince. I read every sentence of every MM and TT artical and came out feeling like I have a much better idea of what they are trying to do.

I can't say I know what it takes to be a good coach, but I think that flexiblity and the willingness to adapt to the strengths of the players is one of the most important qualities in a coach (after motivating and staying focused). I loved the way MM wasn't stubborn about his run game, instead he said he would take what was given and do that for the whole season. He said he would play to the strengths of his players and his team. I don't know, it might be coaching 101 but it seemed like Sherman used to have a plan and then he'd force it to work. He couldn't do anything in the 4-12 season, then McCarthy came in and improved it by leaps and bounds largely because he wasn't stomping his feet about what he didn't have, instead he tried to use what he did have. That makes a GM's job a lot easier. I have to think McCarthy's willingness to use a strength and work around a weakness was a selling point to Ted (among other things of course). Seems like it might be a match made in Packer heaven. The oppertunistic, top level scout and the flexible, open minded coach. I never really questioned TT becuase I could smell what he was stepping in from day one, but MM was a big question mark to me. I acctually liked Sherman the coach and thought it might not pan out letting him go, but MM is making me more of a believer every day.

Packnut
09-09-2007, 08:50 AM
I hope all you guys who are so quick to criticize Fave would read this article thoroughly. Playing QB in the NFL is difficult at best.......

HarveyWallbangers
09-09-2007, 09:57 AM
He couldn't do anything in the 4-12 season, then McCarthy came in and improved it by leaps and bounds largely because he wasn't stomping his feet about what he didn't have, instead he tried to use what he did have.

I'll give Sherman a pass on the 4-12 season. His top three RBs, two of his top three WRs, and his starting TE all missed a majority of the season (thanks to bad luck). Sherm was a good guy and a good coach who just couldn't get the team over the top. I don't think he was a very good GM, and I think the dual roles might have changed the culture around the clubhouse.

Patler
09-09-2007, 10:06 AM
I hope all you guys who are so quick to criticize Fave would read this article thoroughly. Playing QB in the NFL is difficult at best.......

Are you suggesting all QBs should be given leniency for their bad decisions, or just Favre? Should Rodgers too? Grossman? Because of his experience, Favre SHOULD be held to a higher standard than the young QBs.

Sure its hard, but they are the very best of the many, many QBs that rise up through the ranks. They are paid extremely well to do a difficult job, and should be expected to do it. They will make mistakes. EVERYONE makes mistakes from time to time. That doesn't mean the mistakes should be ignored.

Favre has always done a lot of fantastic things on the football field, occasionally things that are incredible. But, he has also made his share of rather foolish mistakes, mistakes that would not be tolerated in less accomplished performers. That's just who he is. If he had been able to eliminate just a few more of those, I think there would be much more of a consensus that he is one of the few, if not the single best to ever play the game. Those ill-advised throws are very prominent in the minds of some of the experts in their ranking of Favre.