Aaron Rodgers now..

[RashanGary]

I thought we were arguing where the failure lies. And the first failure is on the O line which had been horrible at pass blocking. And now may be average.
.

Well, you're arguing with Aaron Rodgers too because he jsut said teh playcalling took pressure of the OL and him getting the ball out quicker was a big part of it.

But if it's just the OL, fine, you have evidence to support that. I disagree, but that's OK too. We have the right to disagree. The QB and coach change and teh OL magically gets better. If you want to believe that, that's yoru choice. I don't have to.

[bobblehead]

The only thing I disagree with you about Waldo, is the part about rodgers getting sacke a lot by free rushers. Sure it has happened, but not THAT often. More often I saw Babre getting blown up, I saw spitz, college, and Cliffy get blown up at times (even sitton once that i recall). I would say ARod is responsible for about 30% of the sacks this year, but that is a guess. Without a top down view of a play I can only guess at that % but I would put money on it being between 25-35%.

I still think he is unquestionably a top 10 QB, and more like 5-7. I think in years to come he will be perennialy top 5. Time will tell, but I like my track record overall.

[RashanGary]

And I think the OL is partially responsible. They're a very average group that was put in a horrible situaiton by a coach and QB.

They're certainly not great, but they're a lot better if you don't put them in the worst possible situation. That's on Aaron and Mike and as this season goes on and you get more quotes, you'll believe it too.

I listen to every word that is said by the Packers and I know most of the people here don't. You might think you have the asnwers, but my info is better researched, more informed and maybe even better reasoned than most here.

[ThunderDan]

I thought we were arguing where the failure lies. And the first failure is on the O line which had been horrible at pass blocking. And now may be average.
.

Well, you're arguing with Aaron Rodgers too because he jsut said teh playcalling took pressure of the OL and him getting the ball out quicker was a big part of it.

But if it's just the OL, fine, you have evidence to support that. I disagree, but that's OK too. We have the right to disagree. The QB and coach change and teh OL magically gets better. If you want to believe that, that's yoru choice. I don't have to.

Once again from the other thread; if the O-Line was playing good why all of a sudden do they need to change play calls? It's because our coach FINALLY figured out that the O-Line is a weakness and made adjustments to cover for it.

[Waldo]

Maybe it was just a lesson Aaron needed to learn on his own. I know I don't just blindly listen. If I believed what I was doing was right, I'd do the same thing Aaron did until I believed in waht the coach was saying.

This. I think that his hand can only be held so far. MM can open the door to the room of the elites, and let Aaron look inside, but Aaron himself is the only one that can step through that door.

Personally though I think that MM was creating a bit of purposeful hardship. I feel very much, and have since early in the year, that Aaron is really on the cusp of greatness, and that McCarthy sees this, that he is willing to create an especially advanced coaching situation for Aaron that can only be done in live games, in order to help Aaron step through that door. Aaron has to find a way to overcome his personal weakness (a tendency to hold the ball too long). Two ways of looking at going about doing that. Either call no/few plays that give him the chance to show his weakness (run and hide from the weakness), or call a lot of plays that give him a chance to show his weakness, to force him to adapt and play beyond it (destroy the weakness).

[RashanGary]

Once again from the other thread; if the O-Line was playing good why all of a sudden do they need to change play calls? It's because our coach FINALLY figured out that the O-Line is a weakness and made adjustments to cover for it.

You might be right, but it's funny how they change and it magically gets better. OL is doing great now. Running well, no sacks. Funny how that works. The Packers are saying it, why won't you?

[ThunderDan]

Once again from the other thread; if the O-Line was playing good why all of a sudden do they need to change play calls? It's because our coach FINALLY figured out that the O-Line is a weakness and made adjustments to cover for it.

You might be right, but it's funny how they change and it magically gets better. OL is doing great now. Running well, no sacks. Funny how that works. The Packers are saying it, why won't you?

Funny that they needed to change, made the change and now are seeing positive results.

[RashanGary]

This. I think that his hand can only be held so far. MM can open the door to the room of the elites, and let Aaron look inside, but Aaron himself is the only one that can step through that door.

Personally though I think that MM was creating a bit of purposeful hardship. I feel very much, and have since early in the year, that Aaron is really on the cusp of greatness, and that McCarthy sees this, that he is willing to create an especially advanced coaching situation for Aaron that can only be done in live games, in order to help Aaron step through that door. Aaron has to find a way to overcome his personal weakness (a tendency to hold the ball too long). Two ways of looking at going about doing that. Either call no/few plays that give him the chance to show his weakness (run and hide from the weakness), or call a lot of plays that give him a chance to show his weakness, to force him to adapt and play beyond it (destroy the weakness).

Very good point. If it works out that way (and it very well could), we're going to be a happy group of Packer fans.

[pbmax]

I thought we were arguing where the failure lies. And the first failure is on the O line which had been horrible at pass blocking. And now may be average.
.

Well, you're arguing with Aaron Rodgers too because he jsut said teh playcalling took pressure of the OL and him getting the ball out quicker was a big part of it.

But if it's just the OL, fine, you have evidence to support that. I disagree, but that's OK too. We have the right to disagree. The QB and coach change and teh OL magically gets better. If you want to believe that, that's yoru choice. I don't have to.

How has this become a point of contention? If the QB and the coach decide to run more screens, and emphasize throwing the checkdown, then the line IS going to look better if pass blocking is their problem. There is nothing magical about it, they just have to hold their guy off for less time.

If the QB is holding the ball too long, he is going to ADD to the problem by not taking advantage of plays where his protection holds up.

Two different problems. Both can be alleviated by altering the game plan, but both still need to be corrected. Rodgers has proven adaptable to throwing to checkdowns. The line has not proven is can pass block well with regularity.

Tauscher and Lang also make this difficult to quantitfy, as their insertion into the lineup did make the line better as pass blocking.

[RashanGary]

Funny that they needed to change, made the change and now are seeing positive results.

8 games later. Look, I'm happy they changed. I think everyone's learned from this first half of the year. Waldo makes a great point and has me considering a better case scenerio that also matches with the things Aaron and Mike have said this year. I can tell Waldo listens to every word because his posts make sense.

Many here hating on teh OL are just wrong. They're not great but they're not bad either. This last 3 weeks is who they are when put in posiiton to succeed.

[ThunderDan]

Once again from the other thread; if the O-Line was playing good why all of a sudden do they need to change play calls? It's because our coach FINALLY figured out that the O-Line is a weakness and made adjustments to cover for it.

You might be right, but it's funny how they change and it magically gets better. OL is doing great now. Running well, no sacks. Funny how that works. The Packers are saying it, why won't you?

ARod would never throw the O-Line or maybe more importantly MM under the bus.

I've been calling for a return to the "true" West Coast Offense since game 1 of the season.

[sharpe1027]

You could always see underneath stuff open that Aaron was ignoring.

If there are 3 to 4 routes being run, which option is the dump off? If it is the 3rd or 4th option, how much time does it take to go through each read? Assuming the first WR takes a second or more to run the first route, how much time is expected for the QB to go through all the progressions?

I have no doubt that there were plenty of times that Rodgers held the ball for a long time. However, I see other QBs do the same thing and only get sacked occasionally. A QB should be able to sometimes hold the ball a little longer. With the OL of the Packers, however, it was an almost guaranteed sack.

The past couple games people are all about Rodger's quick passes, yet several times he stood back there for a very long time before completing a pass. Share some of the blame is fine, but the difference, IMO, still starts and ends with the Oline.

[ThunderDan]

Funny that they needed to change, made the change and now are seeing positive results.

8 games later. Look, I'm happy they changed. I think everyone's learned from this first half of the year. Waldo makes a great point and has me considering a better case scenerio that also matches with the things Aaron and Mike have said this year. I can tell Waldo listens to every word because his posts make sense.

Many here hating on teh OL are just wrong. They're not great but they're not bad either. This last 3 weeks is who they are when put in posiiton to succeed.

And it is on the coach to put the O-Line in a position where they can succeed. MM finally realized this and we win 3 in a row.

[pbmax]

Once again from the other thread; if the O-Line was playing good why all of a sudden do they need to change play calls? It's because our coach FINALLY figured out that the O-Line is a weakness and made adjustments to cover for it.

You might be right, but it's funny how they change and it magically gets better. OL is doing great now. Running well, no sacks. Funny how that works. The Packers are saying it, why won't you?

ARod would never throw the O-Line or maybe more importantly MM under the bus.

I've been calling for a return to the "true" West Coast Offense since game 1 of the season.

So you want to go back to split backs?

[RashanGary]

How has this become a point of contention? If the QB and the coach decide to run more screens, and emphasize throwing the checkdown, then the line IS going to look better if pass blocking is their problem. There is nothing magical about it, they just have to hold their guy off for less time.

If the QB is holding the ball too long, he is going to ADD to the problem by not taking advantage of plays where his protection holds up.

Two different problems. Both can be alleviated by altering the game plan, but both still need to be corrected. Rodgers has proven adaptable to throwing to checkdowns. The line has not proven is can pass block well with regularity.

Tauscher and Lang also make this difficult to quantitfy, as their insertion into the lineup did make the line better as pass blocking.

You say it's normal to have to protect with very few plays called to slow down the rush. The OL is doing a great job with the deep stuff now too. Defenses can't just go at the QB's head any more. That's teh biggest difference according to Rodgers. Maybe you'll belielve it when you hear it. You just don't follow as closely as me so you're a step behind me.