1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
  2. Announcement is LIVE: Read the Forum Post

Absolutely disgusted with the playcalling..

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by Brandon, Dec 3, 2012.

  1. Brandon

    Brandon Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2012
    Messages:
    219
    Ratings:
    +106
    So let me get this straight Mike. You have one of the most atrocious O-Lines in the game at the moment, if not THE most atrocious, and you call a fancy trick play that requires superior up-front blocking and time to develop AGAINST one of the most prolific pass rushing teams in the league? What in the actual frick? Wish I could try and wrap my head around that 'Tom Brady special' they called up.

    I am also just completely stunned at how many runs were called in the 2nd and long situations. When you have a guy like Adrian Peterson you can get away with running on 2nd and 7+ every series, but when you're the Green Bay Packers you LET AARON DO HIS THING. Don't abandon the run by any means, but I swear every single 2nd and long play was a run, which seldom got anywhere.

    I don't get why we aren't trying any screen plays? We virtually never run them, which tells me if done at an opportune moment the defense would likely never see it coming. Again it helps to have a decent O-Line when running a screen, but if you're going to call dumb trick plays then you might as well do something more reasonable...
     
  2. adambr2

    adambr2 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,886
    Ratings:
    +1,424
    Our offense has been struggling, I think they just wanted to throw something else out there. I have no problem with the trick play. The Vikings didn't bite. In the end, it amounted to nothing more than a great punt anyway.

    I actually was pretty happy with the mix of run and pass. I'd like to see more Aaron too, but there seems to be some sort of disconnect between Aaron and his receivers this year. I think he's quite a bit more skiddish this year than he has been in the past. He's not seeing open guys down the field, and sometimes there's just no one open.

    They did try a couple screen plays yesterday, I believe. I can recall one for sure.

    The only playcalling I had a problem with was the 3rd and short. The first one was great on the bootleg, and then we struggled. We really struggle in 3rd and shorts, but that's mostly due to personnel. We don't have a bruising short yardage RB that we can really count on for those situations.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. rodell330

    rodell330 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,989
    Ratings:
    +1,011
    Could be alot better. We need to see more plays where Rodgers is either bootlegging or playaction roll out. We cannot afford to keep him the pocket stationary behind this line or he's going to get killed. At least design more plays where he's on the run where he has a chace to take off if theres nothing there.
     
  4. adambr2

    adambr2 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,886
    Ratings:
    +1,424
    I feel like there are some who feels that MM doesn't run enough, and others that feel that he runs too much.

    So I'm not sure it's the playcalling. I think it's more execution this year, although I do think we sorely miss Philbin. But something isn't right, and we are not dominating defenses like we should. It's a little bit of everything. We are really struggling to solve the Cover 2, that's the book on us right now and MM and Clements need to find ways to adjust.

    I want us to try Barclay at tackle with Lang back at Guard and see if we can't get the pass protection turned around.

    There's a part of me (and I know this is a long shot) that is hoping that maybe we are just sandbagging a little bit on offense right now and not breaking out the entire playbook until the playoffs, unlike last year when teams had us figured out by the time the playoffs started. There does seem to be some opportunities down the middle of the field that we aren't taking advantage of, and it really is to the point where I am hoping we just aren't taking advantage by design.
     
  5. 7thFloorRA

    7thFloorRA Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2011
    Messages:
    1,907
    Ratings:
    +838
    Jennings makes a huge difference in the offense. I thought he was replaceable but he is not. He can get open on his own and he draws the top corner. Once he is open then the other guys start to get open. As the game went on and Jennings started to get the ball Finley and Cobb started to find some holes in the Defense.

    The playcalling was brutal on a few occasions. The Kuhn run is a waste of time and a down. The trick play was awful and Rodgers was stupid for pulling the trigger on it. He should have just eaten it and thrown it out of bounds.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. adambr2

    adambr2 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,886
    Ratings:
    +1,424
    Again, I don't have a problem with Rodgers taking the long shot downfield on the trick play, even if it's not there. Where did they get the ball, their own 6? It was nothing more than a great punt.

    I agree that Jennings does seem to be more important to this offense than he was given credit for. It's somewhat of a trickle down affect where everyone else gets a better matchup with Jennings out.

    This isn't all on the O-coordinator, but if Tom Clements can't find a way to move the ball with Jennings/Nelson/Cobb/Jones as your #1-#4 and Finley coming around with Rodgers throwing them the ball, we need a new offensive coordinator. Running game or not, this is a top 5 offense, not a middle of the pack offense like they've been performing.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  7. favre95

    favre95 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2007
    Messages:
    24
    Ratings:
    +34
    Forgive me if I'm wrong on this, as I am not a huge football mind. Aren't screen plays used when the QB recognizes a blitz coming. From what I saw, I didn't see the Vikings, or for that matter, the Giants the week earlier blitz all that much on us. That being said, much of what was coming at us was just rushing 4 linemen...which is sad to say the least, because they are getting home a ton on us. I could be completely wrong on this but this is how I was told when a screen is used
     
  8. ThxJackVainisi

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    4,030
    Ratings:
    +3,113
    Regarding the OP: Wayne Larrivee, who's been broadcasting NFL games for more than a quarter century, frequently says he doesn't know enough about the intricacies of the "chess match" that's going on during a game to criticize play-calling. On rare occasion it's obvious even to fans when a game is called poorly, like last week against the Giants. And we know that criticism was justified because it was confirmed by McCarthy himself. But that's a rare exception IMO. No offense Brandon, but the above post is an example of 20/20 hindsight combined with poor play - and game - analysis IMO. The comment on the trick play is hindsight because obviously if it had worked there would be no complaint.

    It's poor play analysis because 1) the misdirection of the trick helped the "bad" OL pass protect - both Barclay and Sitton threw blocks in the open field which gave Rodgers time; 2) the evidence of that is Rodgers had time to throw the ball even though the play took a long time to develop, and 3) Jennings was open - he was behind both defenders. The play failed not because the call was bad, not because Rodgers was hurried on the play but because he under-threw it. He admitted as much after the game. So the play-caller (probably) set up a play that would have resulted in a TD if his franchise QB didn't under-thrown it.

    Brandon then goes on to criticize McCarthy for running the ball on 2nd and long. So on the one hand, he calls the OL "one of the most atrocious in the game" and then criticizes McCarthy for running the ball (thereby protecting his franchise QB) in obvious passing situations when the D normally goes all-out rushing the passer. Take out Rodgers' 4 rushes and the Packers ran the ball 32 times for 137 yards, averaging 4.28 yards per play. The two main RBs, Starks and Green, combined for 124 yards on 27 rushes for a 4.59 yards per rush average. I don't have the average per rush on second down but I'll bet it's about that number. So much for "seldom got anywhere".

    So Brandon is "totally disgusted" with an offensive game plan and play-calling that resulted in 435 net yards of offense, that held the ball for 38+ minutes and that resulted in a third down efficiency percentage of 56% (9 of 16). (For context ESPN lists the Patriots at the top of the league at 52.6%.) All that with an OL Brandon calls "one of the most atrocious in the game". So contrary to the OP, that looks like pretty good play-calling under the circumstances.
     
    • Winner Winner x 4
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  9. ExpatPacker

    ExpatPacker Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2011
    Messages:
    1,323
    Ratings:
    +519
    I have noticed this too. AR is not seeing his open receivers the way he did last year. Why that is I can't say. Because he's afraid to throw into coverage? He's too fixed on certain receivers? Not enough pass protection and he's constantly worried about getting hit?
     
  10. Brandon

    Brandon Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2012
    Messages:
    219
    Ratings:
    +106

    You're one of those guys that points to a win or a loss with the stat sheets front and center to give reason for why the game went the way it did, but it really doesn't always work that way I'm afraid. Anyone with a brain knows this game was not ours to win, courtesy of a certain quarterback dressed in purple. Not too often you get trampled for 200+ yards and still survive to get that "W".

    As for hindsight your theory is a bit inaccurate. When I am watching a play develop, for example that trick play, I don't wait until the play is over for my judgment to come in. AS THE PLAY was happening I was shouting, "WTF ARE YOU DOING?!" because I knew then and there, despite the results, the play call was horrendous. The interception solidified my accusation, but even if the catch had miraculously been made I would have simply uttered a, "Wow, got lucky there."

    I wouldn't have thought this game would be so terribly called if not for the fact the last game against the Giants was called very similarly, who are a playoff caliber team. We beat the Vikings because the Vikings are terrible. If we call this same game plan against a team in the playoffs, we are going to lose.... and lose badly.
     
  11. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    16,686
    Ratings:
    +2,977
    Sometimes a play or play is called because they are setting the D up for something later in the game..
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  12. rodell330

    rodell330 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,989
    Ratings:
    +1,011

    True but it has to be working. Say i'm calling MM's favorite runing play? let's say that darn stretch play shall we? and to the left over and over and it's working. Then i get the defense slanting and linemen flowing to the left and i call a backside bootleg to the right with Rodgers or use the tightend to drag across the field coming right? My point is i only call something like that because it's working, MM sometimes tends to call a boring game and the same non effective plays over and over. He doesn't run the typical West coast offense.
     
  13. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    16,686
    Ratings:
    +2,977
    I think we all knew that?

    I have a feeling that in off season he might try to find someone to be the off cord
     
  14. 13 Times Champs

    13 Times Champs Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2011
    Messages:
    3,924
    Ratings:
    +1,379
    I think the play calling does need improvement. I was also yelling wtf immediately on the flea flicker play.
     
  15. The Rivalry

    The Rivalry Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2012
    Messages:
    52
    Ratings:
    +18
    I wouldn't pretend to know the chess match that occurs in real time during the game. HOWEVER- it astounds me that when we are in games where our O-line is obviously overmatched, MM continues to call pass plays that require Rodgers to stay in the pocket, going through his progressions. I understand wanting to maintain the continuity of the passing game, but is that more important than the health of a franchise QB? Good God, roll Rodgers out more and get him into space where he can make plays with his arm or his feet. Slants and three step drops OK, but calling medium and deep route plays from the pocket against teams like NY and Seattle? And on another note, HOW CAN NO ONE BE OPEN ON SO MANY PLAYS? Is Rodgers looking for the deep ball too often and not taking the underneath stuff? Are recievers not working hard enough to break off their routes and get open when the play breaks down? Seems a combination of many things occurring in every game.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. ThxJackVainisi

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    4,030
    Ratings:
    +3,113
    No, I'm one of those guys who uses stats for a game, season, series of seasons, or a career to support my point(s), knowing that they don't tell the whole story but are evidence to be interpreted and reconciled.
    There's no way for the rest of us to know whether or not that is true. And I really don't care because whether or not your criticism was contemporaneous or using hindsight, it's wrong.
    You apparently are one of those guys who uses generalizations and doesn't address specific points when disagreeing with another's point of view. If you would like to address actual points I made in my post, here's summary:


    The trick play:
    1. Rodgers had plenty of time and was not hit in spite of the state of the OL and the time the route took to run.
    2. Jennings was open on the play.
    3. Therefore, the play caller did his job. The play failed because of the execution of the QB.

    Running the ball on second and long:
    1. The Packers converted a high percentage of third downs into first downs, therefore running on second down was generally successful.
    2. The Packers had one of their best games of the season running the ball (measured either by average per rush or total net rushing yards) resulting in a significant advantage in time of possession.

    The inherent contradiction in the OP:
    You complain about the Packers having "… one of the most atrocious O-Lines in the game at the moment…" and then criticize the play caller for recognizing the problems on the OL by calling a 32-35 run-pass mix (removing Rodgers' four rushes), thus winning the TOP and protecting his QB from further hits. In your terms, Rodgers can't "do his thing" behind an "atrocious OL".

    Whether or not the Packers will be able to win a playoff game or make a run in the playoffs will have a lot more to do with the health of the team and the quick progress of the reserves, particularly along the OL than anything else. IMO if the Packers go into the playoffs with an OL of SherrodNewhouse-Hyphon-Saturday-Sitton-Barclay the team won't win three playoff games and it'll have nothing to do with the play calling.

    Larrivee made the point today that the 2010 season is different from this one because the injuries had stopped at this point of the '10 season. Yesterday the Packers get Jennings back and lose Nelson. They're thin on the OL and lose Lang. Matthews has lost a lot of time - will he be back 100% this year? If they can make the playoffs "anything" can happen but it's not looking good to me at this point. And that has nothing to do with the play-calling. And someone who holds the opinion that the Packers have "… one of the most atrocious O-Lines in the game at the moment…" while talking about playoff success is another contradiction.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  17. HyponGrey

    HyponGrey Caseus Locutus Est

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    3,758
    Ratings:
    +1,030
    The Giants didn't blitz. Blitzing from a 4-3 implies you rush more than 4. All the Giants needed was 4.
    Because you can't run a screen when your opponent drops 7. It doesn't work.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  18. Shawnsta3

    Shawnsta3 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2011
    Messages:
    1,036
    Ratings:
    +375
    I will never criticize McCarthy's play-calling because admittedly, it's all over my head. I don't see the Packers everyday in practice, I didn't study film on the opponent and I didn't design the offense. I agree with McGinn on only in rare occasions can you see bad play calling.

    That being said I wouldn't mind if Santa brought coach McCarthy a slant pass or two for Christmas. :p
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  19. slaughter25

    slaughter25 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2011
    Messages:
    727
    Ratings:
    +211

    I did too, possibly for a different reason though. I am a firm believer that a good football team doesn't need gimmicks to win ball games. The Packers eeked out a few big trick plays early in the year and from a timing standpoint I thought it was appropriate. The season was young the team was green and we weren't good enough to line up and simply beat our opponents. But now coming into the home stretch if we dont think we can line up and execute a play designed to attack a lesser opponent I find that to be a bit worrisome.

    Lastly, I think Rodgers had Jennings wide open and the other person running a route (I think it was James Jones) wide open right when he got the ball. There was pressure and he had to step and take that extra second which allowed coverage to catch up to the underthrown ball. Hopefully in the future we dont have to resort to such plays.
     
  20. 13 Times Champs

    13 Times Champs Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2011
    Messages:
    3,924
    Ratings:
    +1,379
    Jack I think you meant an OL of Newhouse etc., not Sherrod above.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  21. 13 Times Champs

    13 Times Champs Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2011
    Messages:
    3,924
    Ratings:
    +1,379
    I thought the play just didn't make sense given the position on the field, the posture of the game, and that we seemed to be moving the ball conventionally when Mike pulled the trigger on it. JMO.
     
  22. JBlood

    JBlood Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2004
    Messages:
    2,627
    Ratings:
    +1,018
    We ran the ball effectively against an above average defense, and the 4th quarter drive brought me back to the 60s with Starr. Rogers is amazing with his scrambling ability and rocket arm. He was off on a few throws, and it's noticed only because of his near perfect season last year. I thought the playcalling was fine. If we can get Matthews and Woodson back we're going to be tough to beat in the playoffs.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  23. GilbertBrown

    GilbertBrown Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2012
    Messages:
    9
    Ratings:
    +1
    all i know is i miss joe philbin
     
  24. 12theTruth

    12theTruth Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    Some can put lipstick on a pig ( ill advised flea flicker) all you want. It still squeals. Other than that play I didn't think McCarthy's calling was too bad. The Packers had their moments but without some help from Ponder we could have lost the game. Still some very good postivies to build on both offense and defense. The thought is with the injured players returning so will our cohesion on our respective offensive and defensive units. The O-line and Crosby IMO the biggest IFS on the team as the season progresses. I'm going to need to see more than one made 48 yard FG as proof that Crosby is over his case of the "yips". 1-8 I believe on 50+ yard FG attempts.
     
  25. HyponGrey

    HyponGrey Caseus Locutus Est

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    3,758
    Ratings:
    +1,030
    Would have liked to see some play action at the end that 11 min drive when we kept getting stuffed for 2-3 yard gains forcing us to obvious passes on third down. The defense had committed the first 2 downs, but I see why they kept on the run (ticktickticktickticktickticktick)
     

Share This Page