Aaron Rodgers now..

[Waldo]

So you want to go back to split backs?

No, just the Non-Verticle WCO.

Personally, I'm okay with the Verticle WCO. AR is one of the most accurate long ball passers in the league, if not the best. His accuracy along the sidelines is ridiculous good. He certainly throws the ball well for having so few long INTs. And that's why I'm okay with it. It's because it's a talent. Why not capitalize on it?

Air Coryell? Like what Martz runs?

[RashanGary]

JH -
Just want to get some clarification:

1 - You don't like MM as a HC and feel that he is holding this team back due to that he doesn't run the ball enough. (didn't throw short enough or keep the pass rush off balance either but generally not happy with how the offense has performed, specifically in taking too many sacks with no adjustment until week 9 or 10 and I share that blame between MM and AR but AR should be expected to learn so it's not as bad with him)

2 - ARod is already a good QB and is becoming very good now and simply wasn't in the very good category prior to the Dallas game (where the win streak and the warm fuzzy's started for everyone) as most here declared. Pretty much, yeah. He was just solid, but way too hot cold until recently. He has a chance to be one of the greatest QB's in packer history with the talent he's shown and the big plays he's made. People saying he was playing great "me included" were wrong until the last three games IMO. He did make a lot of great plays, but way too many bad ones to go with them.


3 - The OL is good but just put in poor situations due to MM's playcalling and ARod holding the ball too long. I think the OL is average, but was being asked to be elite. I think they've proven they are not elite, but are also not horrible. Average. But yeah, the looked worse becasue of the position they were in and I think MM/AR put them in that tough spot.

Not looking to trap you or anything like that. Just want to get where you're coming from.

Bolded to clarify a little, but yeah, I think you had my general feelings pretty well captured there. And these are opinions that can easily change as more evidence is presented. I like to give my opinions as they evolve though and that's it for now.

[Smidgeon]

So you want to go back to split backs?

No, just the Non-Verticle WCO.

Personally, I'm okay with the Verticle WCO. AR is one of the most accurate long ball passers in the league, if not the best. His accuracy along the sidelines is ridiculous good. He certainly throws the ball well for having so few long INTs. And that's why I'm okay with it. It's because it's a talent. Why not capitalize on it?

Air Coryell? Like what Martz runs?

Not quite. I like keeping many of the primary WCO traits like slants, screens, checkdowns, etc, but with AR's ability to place a pass where only the receiver can get it way down the field, I'm really cool with more deep shots than the WCO typically runs.

[RashanGary]

Let's put it this way:

A play caller not calling plays to slow down a pass rush is to an offensive line trying to do it's job as an offensive lineman just missing his block is to a running back trying to do his job.

It just makes the job harder.

[Waldo]

So you want to go back to split backs?

No, just the Non-Verticle WCO.

Personally, I'm okay with the Verticle WCO. AR is one of the most accurate long ball passers in the league, if not the best. His accuracy along the sidelines is ridiculous good. He certainly throws the ball well for having so few long INTs. And that's why I'm okay with it. It's because it's a talent. Why not capitalize on it?

Air Coryell? Like what Martz runs?

Not quite. I like keeping many of the primary WCO traits like slants, screens, checkdowns, etc, but with AR's ability to place a pass where only the receiver can get it way down the field, I'm really cool with more deep shots than the WCO typically runs.

The Air Coryell was the original WCO, including the name. When Walsh developed his offense, he was basically copying the principles of the Air Coryell, but he had a QB ill suited to the deep timing throws, instead he went with shorter timing throws. As he ran it, he found as a playcaller that he could call these passes in run situations. When he switched teams and implemented it in SF, the Run-Pass ratio shift caused him to seek out a pass blockers for his line, their natural athleticism lent themselves to screen plays, which he added, along with a basic zone running scheme.

In short, the WCO is the Air Coryell and the Walsh offense, really the trait that defines a WCO is the timing pass, whether a quick timing pass, or a slow timing pass.

[Smidgeon]

So you want to go back to split backs?

No, just the Non-Verticle WCO.

Personally, I'm okay with the Verticle WCO. AR is one of the most accurate long ball passers in the league, if not the best. His accuracy along the sidelines is ridiculous good. He certainly throws the ball well for having so few long INTs. And that's why I'm okay with it. It's because it's a talent. Why not capitalize on it?

Air Coryell? Like what Martz runs?

Not quite. I like keeping many of the primary WCO traits like slants, screens, checkdowns, etc, but with AR's ability to place a pass where only the receiver can get it way down the field, I'm really cool with more deep shots than the WCO typically runs.

The Air Coryell was the original WCO, including the name. When Walsh developed his offense, he was basically copying the principles of the Air Coryell, but he had a QB ill suited to the deep timing throws, instead he went with shorter timing throws. As he ran it, he found as a playcaller that he could call these passes in run situations. When he switched teams and implemented it in SF, the Run-Pass ratio shift caused him to seek out a pass blockers for his line, their natural athleticism lent themselves to screen plays, which he added, along with a basic zone running scheme.

In short, the WCO is the Air Coryell and the Walsh offense, really the trait that defines a WCO is the timing pass, whether a quick timing pass, or a slow timing pass.

Yet further showing me up due to your football knowledge. Knock it off before I look really bad.

Seriously, that's pretty fascinating. So where does Martz fit into this? Does he still specialize in the "original"?

[pbmax]

Let's put it this way:

A play caller not calling plays to slow down a pass rush is to an offensive line trying to do it's job as an offensive lineman just missing his block is to a running back trying to do his job.

It just makes the job harder.

Good offensive lines don't need the help against all but the best pass rushes. This group needed help against everybody.

As for your contention that its ridiculous that this O line "suddenly" got worse ignores the differences between 07, 08 and 09. Tauscher (pre-injury) and Clifton in 2008 had their worst pass blocking seasons since their rookie campaigns. Colledge has struggled with his pass blocking since he was a rookie and has rarely been consistent. Both he and Wells can be moved back. Sitton is improving, but he has had his misses just as Spitz did as a in his first two year. And Barbre was a catastrophe in pass blocking. He got slightly better (and I think he can improve to be a starter) but is not yet ready for NFL pass blocking. Even now Tauscher, while back and an improvement, is still not 100%.

No matter the point of comparison (09 with 08 or 07), this line pass blocks worse than its predecessors.

[Cheesehead Craig]

JH -
Just want to get some clarification:

1 - You don't like MM as a HC and feel that he is holding this team back due to that he doesn't run the ball enough. (didn't throw short enough or keep the pass rush off balance either but generally not happy with how the offense has performed, specifically in taking too many sacks with no adjustment until week 9 or 10 and I share that blame between MM and AR but AR should be expected to learn so it's not as bad with him)

2 - ARod is already a good QB and is becoming very good now and simply wasn't in the very good category prior to the Dallas game (where the win streak and the warm fuzzy's started for everyone) as most here declared. Pretty much, yeah. He was just solid, but way too hot cold until recently. He has a chance to be one of the greatest QB's in packer history with the talent he's shown and the big plays he's made. People saying he was playing great "me included" were wrong until the last three games IMO. He did make a lot of great plays, but way too many bad ones to go with them.


3 - The OL is good but just put in poor situations due to MM's playcalling and ARod holding the ball too long. I think the OL is average, but was being asked to be elite. I think they've proven they are not elite, but are also not horrible. Average. But yeah, the looked worse becasue of the position they were in and I think MM/AR put them in that tough spot.

Not looking to trap you or anything like that. Just want to get where you're coming from.

Bolded to clarify a little, but yeah, I think you had my general feelings pretty well captured there. And these are opinions that can easily change as more evidence is presented. I like to give my opinions as they evolve though and that's it for now.

Thanks! I thought I had the basics down. Now I understand you better and for some of it, I agree with you. I disagree about the line as I believe that they overall have been poor but better lately. But we'll agree to disagree about that.

[pbmax]

The Air Coryell was the original WCO, including the name. When Walsh developed his offense, he was basically copying the principles of the Air Coryell, but he had a QB ill suited to the deep timing throws, instead he went with shorter timing throws. As he ran it, he found as a playcaller that he could call these passes in run situations. When he switched teams and implemented it in SF, the Run-Pass ratio shift caused him to seek out a pass blockers for his line, their natural athleticism lent themselves to screen plays, which he added, along with a basic zone running scheme.

In short, the WCO is the Air Coryell and the Walsh offense, really the trait that defines a WCO is the timing pass, whether a quick timing pass, or a slow timing pass.

In the most kind was possible, I am calling bullshit on this.

Walsh got his start in pro coaching with the Raiders in 1966, and Al Davis was not running a Air Coryell offense. He was running a Sid Gillman offense. Walsh coached the running backs and was there one year.

Then he moved to the Paul Brown offense with the Bengals for seven years. Ken Anderson (even after Walsh left) and the Bengals ran a more similar offense to the Walsh Offense than anything Gillman or Coryell ran at the time.

Coryell started as a pro coach in 1973, but as Coach of San Diego St. prior to that, would take his entire staff (and I have read, his entire team) to the Chargers practices to watch the offense at work.

There is more Brown in Walsh's offense than there is Gillman. Though later iterations of the Walsh Offense are far more vertical than he was. The naming part of it is legitimate. Gillman had possibly an even more far reaching influence in the pro passing game (Davis, Coryell, Norv Turner, Ernie Zampese, Chuck Noll, Cuck Knox, Dick Vermeil, George Allen, Joe Gibbs, Mike Martz). Gillman should be credited with the first West Coast Offense. Walsh's should have been given a different moniker.

[RashanGary]

Let's put it this way:

A play caller not calling plays to slow down a pass rush is to an offensive line trying to do it's job as an offensive lineman just missing his block is to a running back trying to do his job.

It just makes the job harder.

Good offensive lines don't need the help against all but the best pass rushes. This group needed help against everybody.

As for your contention that its ridiculous that this O line "suddenly" got worse ignores the differences between 07, 08 and 09. Tauscher (pre-injury) and Clifton in 2008 had their worst pass blocking seasons since their rookie campaigns. Colledge has struggled with his pass blocking since he was a rookie and has rarely been consistent. Both he and Wells can be moved back. Sitton is improving, but he has had his misses just as Spitz did as a in his first two year. And Barbre was a catastrophe in pass blocking. He got slightly better (and I think he can improve to be a starter) but is not yet ready for NFL pass blocking. Even now Tauscher, while back and an improvement, is still not 100%.

No matter the point of comparison (09 with 08 or 07), this line pass blocks worse than its predecessors.

The problem with Tauscher being "so much better" is that he came back right when they changed philosophy to the shorter passes and runs. It could be either. I'm open to that. I tend to think it's more AR/MM and you tend to think it's more the OL. I say it was fixed because of changes in focus, you say it changed because Taush is back. Points can be made for both.


If I had to toss blame for the first 8 games, I'd go like this

33% OL Not being good enough
33% QB Not gettnig rid of the ball quick enough
33% Play caller not keeping the defenses off balance and expecting more than his OL is capable of delivering and taking way too long to recognize it wasn't working.


The last three games, I don't think the QB or playcaller have made the problem worse. The OL is still not good enough, but because their being put in position to succeed, we're winning with them. Don't get me wrong, I'd love a star LT. One star LT changes the whole complexion of this line with Lang showing promise of being the RT of the future and the decent interior guys we have. I don't think they're horrible. I think we can win with these guys right now. If we had great ST's and defense, I think this offense is even capable of winning it all but going forward, as a team, we have to find a way to get better and OL is definitely a group that can get better.

[Brandon494]

AR did hold onto the balls for too long at times but the O-line was HORRIBLE the first half of the season. College has stepped his game up since being warned he might lose his job and the addition of Lang has really helped. Also replacing Barbre with Tausher is a huge plus. Yes AR is getting rid of the ball faster but on that 68 yard pass to Driver against the Lions AR held the ball for 6-7 seconds and had time to step into his throw. If Barbre was still starting at RT over Tausher that play is 10 yard loss instead of a 68 yard gain.

[sharpe1027]

The problem with Tauscher being "so much better" is that he came back right when they changed philosophy to the shorter passes and runs. It could be either. I'm open to that. I tend to think it's more AR/MM and you tend to think it's more the OL. I say it was fixed because of changes in focus, you say it changed because Taush is back. Points can be made for both.


If I had to toss blame for the first 8 games, I'd go like this

33% OL Not being good enough
33% QB Not gettnig rid of the ball quick enough
33% Play caller not keeping the defenses off balance and expecting more than his OL is capable of delivering and taking way too long to recognize it wasn't working.


The last three games, I don't think the QB or playcaller have made the problem worse. The OL is still not good enough, but because their being put in position to succeed, we're winning with them. Don't get me wrong, I'd love a star LT. One star LT changes the whole complexion of this line with Lang showing promise of being the RT of the future and the decent interior guys we have. I don't think they're horrible. I think we can win with these guys right now. If we had great ST's and defense, I think this offense is even capable of winning it all but going forward, as a team, we have to find a way to get better and OL is definitely a group that can get better.

For the first seven games, I disagree with anything that allocates less than 70% to the O-line. They couldn't protect against a four man rush even when they got help from backs and TEs. It was really bad.

It wasn't just that they got beat a few times, it was that they got beat consistently. They were on pace to obliterate the season sack record. Rodgers also was got hit a lot even when he got rid of the ball, and those didn't show up as sacks.

Frankly, Rodgers probably avoided more sacks than he was responsible for.

[RashanGary]

When defenses can pin their ears back, it's almost impossible to complete a long pass. That's why you see, even the best offenses, throw screens on 3rd and long or draws. They know that the other team is going to come hard and it's going to be really hard to protect against that.

One of the strangest things this year that I still can't quite pin down is how hard teams were rushing our QB on 1st down. Typically teams play the run and pass on 1st down. Tehy don't pin their ears back and come at the QB's head. It was just strange how many times teams were sending their DE's straight up field.

I have a couple theories as to why. The first one was that teams were showing 8 in the box to get Rodgers to check into a run. Then after the snap they would rush the passer like hell and drop into coverage. The other theory developoed more recently is that MM was calling way to few runs, short passes and screens.

The fervour in which teams were aiming for Rodgers head was just shocking to me. Lately we've been gashing team with runs and screens, which has allowed our offense to sustain long, will breaking drives. I just can't believe we didn't start doing it sooner. This was something I've been following from week 1 (the 1st down sacks). It's something I've really paid attention to.

[sharpe1027]

When defenses can pin their ears back, it's almost impossible to complete a long pass. That's why you see, even the best offenses, throw screens on 3rd and long or draws. They know that the other team is going to come hard and it's going to be really hard to protect against that.

One of the strangest things this year that I still can't quite pin down is how hard teams were rushing our QB on 1st down. Typically teams play the run and pass on 1st down. Tehy don't pin their ears back and come at the QB's head. It was just strange how many times teams were sending their DE's straight up field.

I have a couple theories as to why. The first one was that teams were showing 8 in the box to get Rodgers to check into a run. Then after the snap they would rush the passer like hell and drop into coverage. The other theory developoed more recently is that MM was calling way to few runs, short passes and screens.

The fervour in which teams were aiming for Rodgers head was just shocking to me. Lately we've been gashing team with runs and screens, which has allowed our offense to sustain long, will breaking drives. I just can't believe we didn't start doing it sooner. This was something I've been following from week 1 (the 1st down sacks). It's something I've really paid attention to.

My theory is simple. Really bad O-line play makes a D-line look like they are rushing hard.

[RashanGary]

My theory is simple. Really bad O-line play makes a D-line look like they are rushing hard.

Why are they so much better now, all of a sudden?

Clifton, Colledge and Wells have been in the league a while. Did they suddenly get that much better? Sitton has been pretty consistent all year in not giving up a lot of sacks. After week 1, Barbre ddidn't give up many sacks. It was the whole line sucking ass all at once and then fixing it all at once. It all happened to align with the Packers changing their focus from very few short passes, runs and screens to a lot of them. I don't think that was a coincidence and I don't think Mark Tauscher cured the whole line's woes.