4th and 1

[Patler]

But patler....on THAT play they left Jennings single covered and attacking that was the right play. And now you are arguing that they should have passed it into the teeth of the defense.

My response was not about THAT play. It was with respect to the theoretical four attempts they might have had if they picked up a first down on 4th and 1. Sharpe mentioned that in any following plays Jennings wasn't likely to be as unattended as he was on THAT play. My response was that if he was doubled in those other theoretical situations, another receiver would be less attended, and Flynn could have gone to one of them.

My complaint isn't that Jennings was the wrong option on THAT play, my complaint is that THAT play was the one called with the game on the line and 4th down. A 40 yard throw is not a gimme, but that is what THAT play required. It's like MM settling for the 52 yard FG to win a game in MN, when he had plenty of time to get closer.

[Pugger]

My response was not about THAT play. It was with respect to the theoretical four attempts they might have had if they picked up a first down on 4th and 1. Sharpe mentioned that in any following plays Jennings wasn't likely to be as unattended as he was on THAT play. My response was that if he was doubled in those other theoretical situations, another receiver would be less attended, and Flynn could have gone to one of them.

My complaint isn't that Jennings was the wrong option on THAT play, my complaint is that THAT play was the one called with the game on the line and 4th down. A 40 yard throw is not a gimme, but that is what THAT play required. It's like MM settling for the 52 yard FG to win a game in MN, when he had plenty of time to get closer.

So was it a lousy play call or lousy execution? If Flynn and Jennings connect we are all in here singing their praises. But they didn't so MM sucks at playcalling.

[Patler]

So was it a lousy play call or lousy execution? If Flynn and Jennings connect we are all in here singing their praises. But they didn't so MM sucks at playcalling.

I think my opinion about the play call should be clear, as I have said:

- I think it was a bad call regardless of the result, because it was a low percentage play to start out with.
- I likened it to him playing safe, running three conservative plays with 2 minutes remaining, and settling for a 52 yard FG attempt to win against MN in 2008. Both were low percentage calls.
- I even said that had the play succeeded, it wouldn't make MM a genius, just lucky.

The situation was that there was time left and the Packers had timeouts. They had one play to get one yard, and then have four more plays. MM dials up a play requiring his backup QB to complete a pass going about 40 yards in the air. I would have much preferred a safer play for a first down to get four attempts to score where incompletions didn't end your hope after three of those plays.

MM went with an "all-in" gamble. He was going to get it all, or lose. He bet the game on a single play that had a low percentage chance to be successful. Was it poor execution? Is missing a 52 yard FG poor execution? Is flipping "heads" poor execution when you called "tails"?

[th87]

I disagree that it was a lower percentage play than a safe pass. The Lions stacked the line completely and were likely anticipating pass. Any safe pass would have been well covered, requiring an accurate dart. Do you really trust Flynn with that? All of his passes took forever to get to the receivers. And the line wasn't holding up to allow for the intermediate routes to develop either. Schwartz dared us to do just what we did.

This was the right call. Any NFL QB should be able to hit a 30 yarder to a wide open receiver. This one's on Flynn.

[sheepshead]

I agree. It was the wrong call, at the wrong time against the wrong opponent. At this point in the season and against the Detroit Lions, MM shouldn't have to pull much out of his playbook. He did need to keep the odds in his favor as this may have been the most costly loss of the season.

[Fritz]

I didn't mind the call, really. For one, when the teams lined up it was clear that Jennings had one on one coverage - no safety was in the area. Secondly, it was also clear to me that this offense was continually misfiring - especially the offensive line. Thus, even if the majority of posters here got that short, safe pass for a first down, there was no real indication that the Pack could put the ball in the end zone, especially as the Packers got near the goal line.The Lions' base defense was working so well they didn't need to blitz to get constant pressure on the QB. You should've seen what it looked like when Flynn had the Packers down on the Lions' nine yard line earlier, when he threw that deadly interception. Because the Packers were on the nine, the Lions were able to put defenders all over the damn end zone. There was no where for Flynn to throw.

So when it was 4th and 1 later, I liked the call. It was the best coverage the Pack was going to get, and while it was a difficult throw, it was, to me, no more difficult than if the Pack had marched down the field and gotten to the ten yard line or something, because then Flynn would've had to thread a throw between defenders while the Lions front mauled the Pack's offensive line.

And finally, I got to watch Flynn warm up before the game, and he was whistling 40 yard throws effortlessly. He has a better arm than I thought he did.

[th87]

My beef was with the 2nd down play. Their d line was dominating, so giving the ball to an indecisive runner wasn't the best idea. Especially since he'd have to get past Suh.

[Patler]

I disagree that it was a lower percentage play than a safe pass. The Lions stacked the line completely and were likely anticipating pass. Any safe pass would have been well covered, requiring an accurate dart. Do you really trust Flynn with that? All of his passes took forever to get to the receivers. And the line wasn't holding up to allow for the intermediate routes to develop either. Schwartz dared us to do just what we did.

This was the right call. Any NFL QB should be able to hit a 30 yarder to a wide open receiver. This one's on Flynn.

I trust Flynn to complete something in the 0-15 yard range more than to complete a pass that covered 40 yards in the air. Heck, NFL QBs only complete 55-65% of all passes, including the short ones. Longer ones are less certain than the overall percentage.
Jennings was open, but not like there was room for a throw-it-up-and-let-him-wait-for-it pass. It had to be quite accurate. Favre used to miss those routinely.

[pbmax]

We are definitely a finesse football team which is the likely source of most of the fans frustrations (including me). We don't seem to do anything well without fooling the other team. All I'm saying is that part of me respects MM for keeping literally the entire playbook open. Its an overall offensive mindset that forces your opposition to defend against everything, all the time which is usually impossible.

Not to be pedantic 3irty1 (I understand your point about not having one physically dominant area of the offense), but I don't think the Packers are trying to fool anyone. They throw out every formation and personnel grouping not looking to deceive, but to force a certain defensive look or coverage. And then the QB, if its a pass, is expected to find the single-coverage by pre-snap read or through target progression.

But if I am a defensive coordinator, I look to force them to the most unfavorable target in that progression (hence Cover 2 when there is not threat to the running game). On 3rd and short, that means the Go route is open. If you can hit it, then you cannot be stopped. But not even Rodgers is hitting enough right now.

[th87]

The 0-15 range would have been covered pretty well, IMO. There was no threat to run, so they didn't have to think about that. So all focus would be on short coverage and they'd aggressively jump the routes. I wouldn't trust Flynn to stick it into a tight window like that.

55-65% includes good coverage. Vasher has already proven that he can't cover Jennings, so if he got a good release, he was going to be wide open. An easier shot than forcing it into coverage. An open 3 pointer compared to a heavily contested layup. He missed the open 3.

[th87]

Also, Flynn has proven he can make that throw consistently. He'd already had a long one to Jennings, and the fake punt against the Queens. MM clearly had enough confidence to go there.

[Patler]

An open 3 pointer compared to a heavily contested layup. He missed the open 3.

Yup, and open 3's are routinely missed, too; just like 50 yard field goals.
If your best opportunity to pick up 1 yard is to have your QB throw it 40 yards in the air, there is something wrong with your game plan.

[bobblehead]

My response was not about THAT play. It was with respect to the theoretical four attempts they might have had if they picked up a first down on 4th and 1. Sharpe mentioned that in any following plays Jennings wasn't likely to be as unattended as he was on THAT play. My response was that if he was doubled in those other theoretical situations, another receiver would be less attended, and Flynn could have gone to one of them.

My complaint isn't that Jennings was the wrong option on THAT play, my complaint is that THAT play was the one called with the game on the line and 4th down. A 40 yard throw is not a gimme, but that is what THAT play required. It's like MM settling for the 52 yard FG to win a game in MN, when he had plenty of time to get closer.

Never is the play called for ONE player to get the ball. A play was called, and based on the defense, Jennings was maybe the first option. MM didn't call the play as you are portraying it, Flynn made a read and went with it. I have no problem with the call or the read, simply the execution.

[bobblehead]

I disagree that it was a lower percentage play than a safe pass. The Lions stacked the line completely and were likely anticipating pass. Any safe pass would have been well covered, requiring an accurate dart. Do you really trust Flynn with that? All of his passes took forever to get to the receivers. And the line wasn't holding up to allow for the intermediate routes to develop either. Schwartz dared us to do just what we did.

This was the right call. Any NFL QB should be able to hit a 30 yarder to a wide open receiver. This one's on Flynn.

See what you have done Patler? You have me and th87 agreeing. You are a great uniter.

[bobblehead]

I agree. It was the wrong call, at the wrong time against the wrong opponent. At this point in the season and against the Detroit Lions, MM shouldn't have to pull much out of his playbook. He did need to keep the odds in his favor as this may have been the most costly loss of the season.

We got 3 points all game!! What makes you think the "odds" would have been in our favor with a 3 yard pickup? What makes you think the odds of getting a TD would have been better with a first down than the deep pass? You are right in that we should have had the game comfortably in hand at that point but we did not.

If you all want to bitch, bitch about our inability to run the ball the entire game, and then simply giving up on calling the run when your D was doing well and it was a close game (that we were winning most of the time).