McCarthy/Thompson —-> Gute/Lafleur transition

[RashanGary]

Coaches and players seem more engaged now compared to the last couple years. I sense McCarthy became overbearing.

[Joemailman]

https://theathletic.com/1003014/2019...nity-and-more/

One of the most glaring visual differences between LaFleur’s offense and the one by former coach Mike McCarthy is the former’s reliance on condensed formations, the use of which seemed to increase during the red-zone session. Where McCarthy preferred to spread his receivers across the field — often times with equal distance between them, stretching toward the sideline — LaFleur enjoys clustering his receivers near the end of the offensive line, a staple of the Sean McVay and Kyle Shanahan systems.

These tighter formations typically feature a trio of receivers just a few yards from the offensive tackle on that side of the field, and there is generally a tight end on the opposite side to balance the formation. The easiest way to picture it is a three-by-one alignment.

From an offensive perspective, the benefits of narrower formations include varying the types of releases for wide receivers (who are no longer walled off by the sideline), reducing the efficacy of press coverage (because it’s more difficult to press without the sideline) and increasing the chances of natural pick routes (as wide receivers break from the trio and cross each other’s paths within the first few yards).

“It’s complex,” Adams said. “It’s a lot to it, but it’s nothing we can’t handle. It’s really early still, so we’re still getting a good feel for how we run certain routes, the quarterbacks on certain timing. But that’s what this time is for, to practice and get better and get on the same page.

“It’s inviting a lot less press coverage, but something I’ve been comfortable with is press coverage, so it’s not like it’s taking anything away or adding anything really. It’s going to allow me to get out and get into my routes a lot easier, and if guys want to still move with motions and matching and press from there, it’s just going to take it back to what I’m used to. So at the end of the day, I feel like it’s a win-win for the offense.”

[pbmax]

Yeah, it was hard to get excited about some of the coaching additions MM brought in last year. For the fans, and I suspect, the players. I think it manifested itself in Rodgers' play, and in some of the terrible 1st half performances the team had last year. Some of the coaching additions on the offensive side do seem to have a short resume, so we'll see. More uncertainty, but definitely more excitement.

I think the offense overall was just stale. No voices who could argue for something different were ever brought in, agreed.

But on Defense, I was excited by what Pettine brought in. Even though McCarthy hired him without much of a search (he was the first person interviewed) which was itself another reminder that M3 could be his own worst enemy.

[pbmax]

https://theathletic.com/1003014/2019...nity-and-more/

“It’s inviting a lot less press coverage, but something I’ve been comfortable with is press coverage, so it’s not like it’s taking anything away or adding anything really. It’s going to allow me to get out and get into my routes a lot easier, and if guys want to still move with motions and matching and press from there, it’s just going to take it back to what I’m used to. So at the end of the day, I feel like it’s a win-win for the offense.”

Is he talking about the defense or other receivers?

[Joemailman]

It's occurred to me that on passing plays that what Pettine and LaFleur/Hackett are trying to accomplish are mirror images of each other. Pettine will be trying to confuse opponents blocking assignments so he has someone running free at the QB. LaFleur/Hackett willl be trying to confuse coverage assignments with bunch formations that result in an uncovered receiver.

[pbmax]

My fear this year is that it really will be Sherman 2.0 and they will attempt to run a lot. And after breakdowns to RB and OL, that will go nowhere. Then they will start to pass. But not have the installs to run a predominantly pass first, perhaps second and definitely third offense.

I hope I am wrong, but coaches tend to move the pieces one at a time.

[mraynrand]

There’s no reason to go full U71 but they will stress run, And it will make play action work better. I see a wide open offense being possible. I am most curious to see how the deep passing game works in this offense with Rodgers. More off play action or do they Telegraph it with the running back they keep in to block

What I don’t want to see is a heavy dose of the close vested underneath passing game that can be defeated with a matchup zone.

[mraynrand]

Is he talking about the defense or other receivers?

Defense.

[texaspackerbacker]

The good sense thing to do - and what I strongly think they will do - is NOT to run first, but to emphasize what the Packers personnel is best suited for: pass first with a mobile QB buying time when the O Line lets the D right through. The more things change, the more they stay the same. Aaron Rodgers is the solution that makes all good things possible. Going away from that would be a recipe for failure, but likely, LaFleur is smart enough not to do that.

Press coverage - which that quote was talking about - will be eaten up by Aaron Rodgers. Extend the play and hit the receivers after they defeat the press. Umbrella coverage of some sort is what would be more effective, but if they do that, you just pass underneath - not the Packers strength, but certainly doable.

[pbmax]

Press coverage - which that quote was talking about - will be eaten up by Aaron Rodgers. Extend the play and hit the receivers after they defeat the press. Umbrella coverage of some sort is what would be more effective, but if they do that, you just pass underneath - not the Packers strength, but certainly doable.

Press coverage is beaten with the extended offense when you have Nelson, Cobb, Adams and Cook. With no Nelson, limited Cobb, no Cook and only Adams, you get let season. That might not be giving Rodgers enough credit: he made the extended offense work to near MVP level in 2016 with Adams, Cobb, Jones and Cook.

Agree that a shell deep forcing the Packers to throw short worked best when they were at their best. M3's response was to go hurry up and throw shorter and shorter, which slowly crippled the offense.

[mraynrand]

Tex is advocating for a broken offense

[Joemailman]

Tex is advocating for a broken offense

Why not? Last year was so much fun.

[pbmax]

I want 98% passing in first half.

Get a 2 TD+ lead.

Then 98% running in second half.

Balance.

[texaspackerbacker]

Tex is advocating for a broken offense

Granted, things didn't go well with lesser receivers. I'm expecting, though, with another year of experience, MVS, St. Brown, maybe Moore and maybe a healthy Graham can be deep threats, and Allison can be a more than decent possession receiver. That plus a little bit more coaching creativity on routes, etc. and we should see something a lot better.

A "broken offense" would be what pbmax described above: forcing a run-first thing with good but not great RBs and ok but not much more than that O Line. I am confident - until he shows otherwise - that LaFleur is smarter than that, and even if he proves not to be, that Aaron Rodgers will change plays away from a lot of runs, as needed.

[MadScientist]

Granted, things didn't go well with lesser receivers. I'm expecting, though, with another year of experience, MVS, St. Brown, maybe Moore and maybe a healthy Graham can be deep threats, and Allison can be a more than decent possession receiver. That plus a little bit more coaching creativity on routes, etc. and we should see something a lot better.

A "broken offense" would be what pbmax described above: forcing a run-first thing with good but not great RBs and ok but not much more than that O Line. I am confident - until he shows otherwise - that LaFleur is smarter than that, and even if he proves not to be, that Aaron Rodgers will change plays away from a lot of runs, as needed.

Other than I think Graham is not much of a deep threat, I generally agree with this analysis. However there is nothing wrong with scheming receivers open and taking an easy 5-12 yard completion, with a chance for YAC. Nothing is preventing LaFleur from keeping elements of the extended offense for when the guy who is schemed open isn't. Let Rodgers manage the game and then go for the jugular when the opportunity arises. Mix in running as needed, just as long as they aren't so fucking predictable about it.