Do we have a Rodgers problem?

[Harlan Huckleby]

Funny that for most of the last 20 or so games, he has not played like a QB in his prime. QB performance is not always tied to physical condition or physical ability.

You discussed his slide while saying he could be done in a couple years. This insinuates that his struggles are age related.

You question here whether Rodgers is still in his prime, again suggesting he is in age-related decline.

I don't think Rodger's struggles are age related. If you agree with me, then your posts have been ambiguous. Or maybe it's me, not you, but we need start seeing other people.

[Patler]

You discussed his slide while saying he could be done in a couple years. This insinuates that his struggles are age related.

You question here whether Rodgers is still in his prime, again suggesting he is in age-related decline.

I don't think Rodger's struggles are age related. If you agree with me, then your posts have been ambiguous.

Baloney. I have always related it to his performance. I have simply pointed out that at 32-33 years old we shouldn't be surprised. AR can be entering a stage in which his performance will not be the same as it was at 25-30 years old and may never again return to that. I have said for the last year that it bears watching.

[beveaux1]

I think we're seeing a little bit of a pattern in the McCarthy-Rodgers offense. One of the posters said that McCarthy is allowing Rodgers too much freedom which would harken to the Sherman-Favre days. I would point out that after Rodgers showed anger in not being allowed a 4th down chance in Jacksonville, McCarthy "made up" for it against Minnesota. It also may well have cost us the game. This is troubling to me.

Defenses have found a way to severely limit our offense by mugging our receivers and we have no solution for it. A season's worth of games if you count the playoffs, and we still can't find a way to beat press man coverage with 2 deep safeties.

Even the teams with poor CBs lock up our receivers. Rodgers' strength has never been comebacks in close games. He's always been much better at racing to a big lead. I don't have any solutions, but I agree with Patler that Rodgers' accuracy is noticeably worse.

[Patler]

You discussed his slide while saying he could be done in a couple years. This insinuates that his struggles are age related.

Ah, no, it does not. "Being done" means being done, as in not PERFORMING to the level required. Some are done before they start. SOme are done in their early 30s. SOme are done in their mid 30s, and only a very few are not done until their late 30s. or early 40s. I have always recognized that it could be at any time.

You on the other hand seem to think that since he is only soon to be 33, he can't possible be on the downside of his career. The fact is that he CAN be. Not that he is or isn't, but can be. Again, it bears watching.

[Patler]

You question here whether Rodgers is still in his prime, again suggesting he is in age-related decline.

Perhaps you think an athlete being in his prime is age related, I have always thought it was a performance thing.
As you like to say, I think it is time for us to agree that you are wrong and I am right.

[Rutnstrut]

Could it be that Rodgers just isn't as good as everyone thought? Perhaps he's just really good, not great. His great seasons could have just been a "perfect storm" of things going his way.

[pbmax]

He has lost accuracy too. I wonder if it's partly mechanics.

He is waiting for the big one on one play to open up, if not the first window, then in the second, if not the second then on a scramble drill.

Problem is that his O line the last couple of years is not as leak proof as it has been previously. Rodgers has also been hurt (collarbone and calf). So he doesn't trust his protection and his movement in the pocket is more scattershot and less productive. He has done this before, dancing in the pocket too much without getting a lane to throw through.

The O line also has issues inside and out. Bach is not Clifton. You cannot ignore your back with him in pass pro. Yes he had a rough night on the road in a dome last night, but he gets beat enough that the QB has to be on the watch. Same to a lesser extent with Bulaga. Normally you want to step up, but with new people in front and the Vikes in a 5 man front, there is nowhere to go.

The reliance on the deep game hurts because its not working for all the reasons listed above.

They need to finish reinventing the offense, because the hybrid Rodgers/McCarthy model is too well known.

[pbmax]

Could it be that Rodgers just isn't as good as everyone thought? Perhaps he's just really good, not great. His great seasons could have just been a "perfect storm" of things going his way.

His accuracy has declined. That is new.

[pbmax]

I think we're seeing a little bit of a pattern in the McCarthy-Rodgers offense. One of the posters said that McCarthy is allowing Rodgers too much freedom which would harken to the Sherman-Favre days. I would point out that after Rodgers showed anger in not being allowed a 4th down chance in Jacksonville, McCarthy "made up" for it against Minnesota. It also may well have cost us the game. This is troubling to me.
.

I don't know about that. So Rodgers went to the sideline in Jacksonville and said coach I know we can RUN for the TD?

Giving the QB a run on 4th down isn't much of a reward.

McCarthy said he liked the long, time consuming 12 play drive and thought his offense had the better of the Viking D on that series. And he liked his play call.

[Fritz]

It depends what you mean by "problem". If you are relying on him to be the same QB that he was in 2012, 2013 and early 2014; then, yes there is a problem. He has not been that QB for a while now. I have been trying to explain that in an unemotional, reasoned way since during the 2015 season. At soon to be 33 years old, it is becoming more and more likely that AR and the Packers need to enter a new understanding of how to use his skills, which still are significant. It's not really even the skills that are the problem, it's the freedom (and deference) that he is given in how he carries out his responsibilities play to play.

The Packers very likely WILL have a decision to make two years from now, just as I have been saying for the last year. Should they keep their wagon hitched to the then soon to be 35 year old Aaron Rodgers, or embark on the next era with Brett Hundley (assuming the 2014 preseason was more than a mirage)? I had hoped that preseason 2016 would bring information for that decision, but due to Hundley's injury, it did not. Hopefully, 2017 will. Many QBs are basically hanging on after 35, and very few play at all, let alone play well in their late 30s. Finding AR's successor will not be easy, and if Hundley shows promise of being that, it might be unwise to let him walk out the door.

This is what I believe to be the case. Last year the narrative was "look how much the Packers miss Nelson." Nelson's back, and though he's not quite all the way back, it's clear Rodgers' performance is still shaky.

He is missing receivers, more and more and more. He missed Cook on a short, easy throw from inside his own ten yard line in the fourth. Later, he missed Cobb over the middle. Collinsworth said pressure came from Rodgers's left, and maybe so, but Rodgers got the throw off - and it was enough behind Cobb that the defender could knock it away. Rodgers missed Nelson long, he missed Adams long. On that interception at the end, Adams was open. But Rodgers, as is increasingly his wont to do, threw - or rather, lofted - the ball off his back foot. Oh, and then there's the double-hitch near-interception when the Packers were down on the Minnesota ten or so later in the game.

The announcers are still slathering over Rodgers's ability to extend plays, but I wonder if he's becoming hesitant.

I'd like to see MM send Rodgers back to QB school. Set your feet, move into the throw. All this jittering, back-foot throwing - it hasn't been working for a while. This leads me to wonder if in fact this is turning into something reminiscent of Sherman-Favre. Rodgers, to me, is becoming the problem.

Hell, TJ Lang discussed the first-down sack by Joseph, saying that the call was to slide the protection right. They all slid right, but Rodgers decided to drift left - right into Joseph.

Rodgers's QB rating has not been over 100 for a long time. I don't see the "we're just getting into a rhythm" thing as being too valid, as Sam Bradford seemed in fine rhythm after two weeks in an offensive system, and without a running game to boot.

The only possible excuse I can offer is that this is the divedend of not playing Rodgers in preseason. And maybe they will find a rhythm. But then again, this seems more like a continuation of last year than it does a team just needing to knock off the rust.

[Patler]

I don't know about that. So Rodgers went to the sideline in Jacksonville and said coach I know we can RUN for the TD?

Giving the QB a run on 4th down isn't much of a reward.

McCarthy said he liked the long, time consuming 12 play drive and thought his offense had the better of the Viking D on that series. And he liked his play call.

Agreed. Besides, I'm not convinced that Rodgers' anger was as much about the 4th down FG as it was about the botched 3rd down play with the line blocking "pass" and the backfield playing "run".

[Fritz]

I didn't mind the play call, but what I did mind was the personnel. Where was Lacy, the battering ram? Why Starks? Lacy was gone for long stretches during that game. It was strange.

I felt most confident when MM came out - was it the fourth quarter, or beginning of third? - with that two-tight end, Lacy deep behind Rodgers formation. I thought, finally, they're going to run the damn ball. And if TJ Lang hadn't been holding on Lacy's longer run, they might've kept to it.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I have always thought it was a performance thing.

Rodger's poor performance is a performance thing. It sounds like your position on age is that you take no position. I take a position: America and Rodger's best years are yet to come. Thank You and God Bless the Packers!

[Patler]

Could it be that Rodgers just isn't as good as everyone thought? Perhaps he's just really good, not great. His great seasons could have just been a "perfect storm" of things going his way.

It might be more of how long his greatness lasted. From 2009 to 2014 he was pretty great, and that would be an awful long long "perfect storm".

On the other hand, it very well might be that Rodgers, Nelson, Cobb and Lacy all had "career years" in 2014. If that is the case, it will not be matched again, yet that seems to be the standard many fans are expecting. While I think the offense is clearly under-performing, our expectations might be a bit too high as well.

[Patler]

I have always thought it was a performance thing.

Rodger's poor performance is a performance thing. It sounds like your position on age is that you take no position. I take a position: America and Rodger's best years are yet to come. Thank You and God Bless the Packers!

and once again, you edit a quote to support your skewed reasoning. What I wrote was "Perhaps you think an athlete being in his prime is age related, I have always thought it was a performance thing."


I take a position on age too. I like it. Age is a good thing. Getting old is a good thing. Being really old is a good thing. I speak from experience (which comes with age). However, I'm not sure how much I want to discuss my performance and age. It's kind of personal.