Rodgers hidden turnovers

[swhitset]

I'm not trying to split hairs but I'm of a mind that that football is a lot like cards and you sometimes have to show your opponent what you're willing to do. Losing on a bluff with nothing can be a long term advantage especially when your opponents have to factor in a possible bluff and doubly so if you fed them a couple false tells. Likewise every so often its a good idea to attack downfield on 3rd and short, it's just that we do it too often.

I was trying to tell myself that that is what the Packers were doing earlier in the season... unfortunately I think it was wishful thinking. I do agree with the concept though.

 

[easyk83]

Rodgers definitely needs to be better on third down but a sack isn't close to a turnover most times. In fact it is about a 30 to 40 yard difference. Why not call incomplete passes on 3rd down or bad run plays turnovers too? Or third down passes that are complete but don't result in a first down.

Also not even close to all sacks are on Rodgers. Some are on ridiculous play calls - the fake reverse that took 4 seconds to develop and by the time Rodgers turned around he was sacked. Some are bad pass blocking. The non dump off to Jones everyone is complaining about this week is a good example. A dump off is obviously not the first read on that play. Rodgers looks off the safety then looks at the read which isn't there and then is flushed left away from Jones. He could dumped to Jones right away but if the right side doesn't get blown up he can actually do it after his first read like intended.

Rodgers has to play better but the takes that we need to start dumping it off all the time and not take shots down field are getting ridiculous. The takes that Rodgers getting sacked is always because he holds the ball too long is ridiculous. We need to understand he will get sacked a couple times as he scrambles and waits for thibgs to develop and he will turn those plays into big throws to the te for a TD and Adams for big gains.

It is to the point now where people are waiting to complain. Heck people were complaining after Rodgers hit Adams for the big play on third down because he shouldn't thrown deep. Do people not remember the year Jordy got hurt and he was dumping it off all the time and fans were complaining all the time?

The team needs Rodgers to play better because they are not that great. He just hasn't done it. He has saved a couple games but hasn't saved a few others. Honestly I really don't think it is lack of dumping the ball off or too many sacks (he has done those things during elite years) it is that he just hasn't been accurate. Part of that may be timing with young wrs but he has just missed open wrs in ways we are not accustomed.

The idea that interceptions should never be compared to sacks is a facile argument. Typically when judging defensive players 2-3 sacks is the equivalent of a pick, so why not here as well. If Rodgers is taking too many sacks then that absolutely would hurt the offenses ability to sustain drives and score points. So if a Quarterback s style lessens the number of picks but results in more sacks and sack fumbles then I would argue that we should attempt a comparison to the extent that we can equivocate numbers. Though it doesnt work on a 1 for 1 comparison could multiple sacks cause the same harm as a pick? Yes.

As for a short completion or bad run I'd look at it as a matter of potential. Typically a receiver or running back is much more athletic than a quarterback. Putting the ball in play carries a chance of success. Likewise a quarterback holding the ball too long against the rush is almost a guaranteed drive killer on third down. Consider Russell Wilson who was sacked a bunch on Thursday, the difference was that he was getting the ball out quicker and avoiding sacks on third downs while Rodgers was not. This resulted in a significantly better performance on third down, still not great but converting almost 40% of third downs is a damn sight better than being under 30%.

 

[HardRightEdge]

First do you disagree with the notion that Rodgers game could be improved? Second are we under utilizing Aaron Jones? Third do you think that Rodgers is taking too many sacks?

if Rodgers TD to interception ratio comes at a cost of increased sacks then it certainly make sense to compare the two under the umbrella of offensive failings. This is especially salient when those sacks are ending possessions.

Rodgers game could be improved if he wasn't playing on a bum knee and if he had a better supporting cast. Aaron Jones...nice player having a nice game...then he met Bobby Wagner. I think Aaron Rodgers is taking the sacks that Aaron Rodgers is going to take playing the game that Aaron Rodgers is playing which is the same game Aaron Rodgers has always played given the players Aaron Rodgers is playing with. Whether Allison and Cobb or two rookie WRs, these are merely adequate or inexperienced players.

Taking a sack is much better than throwing a pick. If he holds the ball and gets sacked on 3rd. down it's because throwing the ball away gets him to a punt anyway.

He's pretty much the same player he was when the team was winning, though his escapability still looks limited. If you liked him then you should like him now.

 

[swhitset]

Rodgers game could be improved if he wasn't playing on a bum knee and if he had a better supporting cast. Aaron Jones...nice player having a nice game...then he met Bobby Wagner. I think Aaron Rodgers is taking the sacks that Aaron Rodgers is going to take playing the game that Aaron Rodgers is playing which is the same game Aaron Rodgers has always played given the players Aaron Rodgers is playing with. Whether Allison and Cobb or two rookie WRs. These are merely adequate or inexperienced players.

Taking a sack is much better than throwing a pick. If he holds the ball and gets sacked on 3rd. down it's because throwing the ball away gets him to a punt anyway.

He's pretty much the same player he was when the team was winning, though his escapability still looks limited. If you liked him then you should like him now.

Your second to last paragraph is only true if we accept your premise. The 3rd downs we have been talking about recently have been 3rd and short... and yet Rodgers is holding the ball and looks at nothing but the downfield throw. Whether it’s Mcarthy’s play calls or Rodgers ignoring it... where are the short dumps to the running back... or the quick slant across the middle when all we need is 2 yards?

 

[HardRightEdge]

Your second to last paragraph is only true if we accept your premise. The 3rd downs we have been talking about recently have been 3rd and short... and yet Rodgers is holding the ball and looks at nothing but the downfield throw. Whether it’s Mcarthy’s play calls or Rodgers ignoring it... where are the short dumps to the running back... or the quick slant across the middle when all we need is 2 yards?

We went through all this before in the first half of 2016. Rodgers is going to be Rodgers whether you like it or not.

 

[swhitset]

We went through all this before in the first half of 2016. Rodgers is going to be Rodgers whether you like it or not.

Lol well if it’s that simple I guess we might as well shut down this forum... and all of this talk about replacing McCarthy is pointless as well.

 

[SoonerPack]

I think both sides of the argument have some fair points and that is what keeps fueling the fire. When only one side has "the goods" the argument typically peters out. In many ways, AR is playing the way he always has when it comes to holding onto the ball and not forcing things. In my eyes the biggest difference this year is the accuracy. I used to expect darn near every single throw to be right on point and either be caught or dropped. I am seeing balls sail over guys heads and even a few throws coming up short which really throws me for a loop. The injury has to be playing a significant role in this for many a reason. A, he isn't getting the reps in practice to sync up with is guys, both new and old. B, I know he has always thrown from all sorts of different angles and platforms so it may be hard to pinpoint which throws are giving him the biggest problem but the fact is, he isn't hitting guys nearly as often as we're accustomed to.

I am in the camp of fans wanting to see some shorter/intermediate stuff get worked into the gameplan. I get going for everything on 3rd and short every now and then but not almost every time. Moving the chains and eating up yardage is the name is the best way to score while also helping your D get some rest. Since we aren't in the locker room it's impossible to say who's to blame for this but I tend to look the direction of the playcaller. AR, like almost all QB's, wants to make the big plays and I understand that. My problem is it doesn't take a genius to see that on 3rd and 3 you have a much better chance of conversion throwing the ball within 10 yards of the LOS opposed to 20+ down field. For every one of those plays we convert there are 3-4 we don't which all result in punts/FG attempts. Game after game after game I keep expecting to see something change but it doesn't and this is my main reason for looking in Mike's direction. I just hope we can get things rolling and start playing the type of ball we are accustomed to seeing. Right now, this sucks and there's no other way to put it.

G P G.

 

[PackAttack12]

HRE is making the same point I've continuously been making. Aaron Rodgers' playing style has never been a problem and he hasn't deviated from his style, but now that the team is losing, it's a problem.

At the end of the day, you can't replace Rodgers. And clearly McCarthy either can't change Rodgers' mindset, or doesn't want to change his mindset. And it's going to eventually result in the same thing if the Packers continue to lose and that's McCarthy losing his job. That's the reality of the situation.

 

[Half Empty]

The thread Winning Cures Everything is all we need to virtually any topic here. Favre was great when his antics won games, not so much with the backbreaking INTs.

 

[Patriotplayer90]

At least nobody waaay downfield.

Who is calling the plays, and why are they sending someone way downfield on 3rd down? And why are these short, easy targets suddenly not available when we have a backup QB? Surely he could make those throws.

 

[Half Empty]

Have you seen their backup QBs? Plus, seriously, do you expect someone with the game experience of a Packer backup to be able to check down as smoothly as someone with AR's talent and experience?

 

[swhitset]

Who is calling the plays, and why are they sending someone way downfield on 3rd down? And why are these short, easy targets suddenly not available when we have a backup QB? Surely he could make those throws.

The backups couldn’t get us to 3rd and short in the first place.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

2) Get Rodgers to work the entire field. His obsession with the down field passing game is limiting his play and the offense. When teams are dropping back into three deep coverage and giving you a 10-15 yard bubble aside from a linebacker spy you have to hit those checkdowns make them pay for it. They get a running or fullback rumbling into their secondary enough times it'll not only loosen up the downfield game but it'll wear down their DBs... thinking of which we could use a good 230 pound bruiser who can catch. A DC sees a bruising physical back running over his CBs and safeties once or twice and he'll change the way he calls a game.

Can't remember who (sorry for not attributing correctly) but someone had an amazing post that pointed out that Rodgers is doing nothing new with his preference for the deep ball vs the checkdown. He's doing the same things that he's always done. Yes, it would be nice if he suddenly embraced the check down when the offense is obviously malfunctioning, but blaming the current woes on his hesitancy for checking down is ignoring the fact that he's ALWAYS done this. It doesn't seem logical to blame a new development in the offense (not being an elite offense) on something that's always existed in the offense.

 

[Mondio]

He didn't ignore them in the first half. Must have changed schemes in the 2nd?

 

[HardRightEdge]

Lol well if it’s that simple I guess we might as well shut down this forum...

There's a lot more going on with this team than "what's wrong with Rodgers?" obsession, so the life of the Forum can go on.

You should have noted that my comments were to the affect that Rodgers is who he's always been, taking into account the knee issue and the surrounding cast, not that he is flawless. You could dig deeper and ask the question, "is what's wrong with Rodgers what has always been wrong with Rodgers?" Nobody is perfect, you take the bad with the good. So, there's a Rodgers topic to explore.

...all of this talk about replacing McCarthy is pointless as well.

That's a different topic which goes a lot deeper than third and short play calling, that 19th. ranked 3rd. down coversion rate or the 14th. ranked red zone TD %. There's the issue of whether this is a fundamentally sound football team, with the number of critical mistakes, the penalties and the lack of discipline. That's on the coaches.

But my main point is that sacks are not "hidden turnovers".

 

[Patriotplayer90]

Can't remember who (sorry for not attributing correctly) but someone had an amazing post that pointed out that Rodgers is doing nothing new with his preference for the deep ball vs the checkdown. He's doing the same things that he's always done. Yes, it would be nice if he suddenly embraced the check down when the offense is obviously malfunctioning, but blaming the current woes on his hesitancy for checking down is ignoring the fact that he's ALWAYS done this. It doesn't seem logical to blame a new development in the offense (not being an elite offense) on something that's always existed in the offense.

This is a reflection of the coaching staff. He doesn't like to check down? The play design and play calling can easily be altered to reflect that. Play to your players strengths, that's the job of the coach. Rodgers has unbelievable strengths and "weaknesses" which are laughable to fans of any other team and can easily be hidden.

It's not that he wants to hit the home run, he just hates to put his receivers in harm's way and hates throwing INTs. These check downs increase the opportunity for both, as someone is always waiting to take those guys'heads off, and one false step by the receiver could easily exactly in a disastrous TO. And most plays now are scripted, and the OC is doing most of the work and determining where the ball should go. We are really the only top passing offense which is 100% dependant on the QB pre-snap and post-snap. McCarthy is too stubborn to call plays according to what is effective and what the defense is giving him, and the QB play is a reflection of that.

 

[HardRightEdge]

HRE is making the same point I've continuously been making. Aaron Rodgers' playing style has never been a problem and he hasn't deviated from his style, but now that the team is losing, it's a problem.

At the end of the day, you can't replace Rodgers. And clearly McCarthy either can't change Rodgers' mindset, or doesn't want to change his mindset. And it's going to eventually result in the same thing if the Packers continue to lose and that's McCarthy losing his job. That's the reality of the situation.

I've cited on several occasions the second half of the Dallas game in 2016 and the Bears game that followed as examples of the Packers being willing and able to run a ball control passing offense.

Consider the Dallas game starting with the last possession of the first half:

• Rodgers: 23 of 26, 218 yards
• Longest completion 25 yards to Nelson, otherwise nothing longer than 15 yards
• Montogomery featured with 8 catches on 10 targets for 60 yards
• 5 of 7 on 3rd. down which would have been 6 of 7 had Montogomery not fumbled on the Packers last offensive play
• It was a case of taking what was given against 2 high safeties, soft zones and slowish LBs
• The comeback was derailed by an interception at the Dallas 48 yard line, a Rodgers fumble at the Dallas 1 yard line, and the Montgomery fumble (which may have been too late to matter) in the second half.
• This shooting one's self in the foot is reminiscent of this season's serial miscues.

Or consider the Bears game that foll0wed:

• Rodgers 39 of 56, 326 yards, 3 TDs, no ints.
• Longest completion 25 yards to Cobb
• Montogomery featured again, 10 catches on 13 targets, 66 yards
• 1 turnover vs. the Bears 2 turnovers
• First downs, time of possession, plays run, 3rd. and 4th. down coversions, 6 red zone opportunities vs. the Bears 0: Taken together the contrasts are quite striking running a ball control offense
• http://www.espn.com/nfl/matchup?gameId=400874429

So the challenge, if anyone chooses to accept it, is this: If McCarthy and Rodgers have been willing and able to run a ball control passing game with lots of timing routes over 6+ quarters with success in the past, why not since? And why not this season in particular, changing things up in the middle of games when the offense goes flat?

Some possible clues might be 1) what the defenses are giving, 2) in some cases having to dig out of a hole, 3) lack of confidence in chemistry with receivers making the pick in the middle of the field a higher than normal risk and/or 4) sutbborness.