That's for sure. I see Cutler and the Bears using that play too. On Sunday the Bears used it on two consecutive plays, once to each side. Neither gained anything.
Is the offence the problem?
- Thread starter rodell330
- Start date
Longtimefan makes some great points about the Pats struggles last season. You can add the Packers slow start ending with Rodgers "relax" comments.
It's a long season, filled with peaks and valleys. No team can be at the top of their game every week, and sooner or later every team is gonna have a clunker like our team did the other night. It's one game in a marathon. I knew we were likely in for a long night when I learned the Broncos had their Super Bowl team and other franchise greats at the game to honor Pat Bowlen. Think the opener with Seattle last season; we were running into an emotional buzz saw.
That said, there are serious issues for this team to address, many of which were exposed in Denver.
I believe I posted at the beginning of the season that the loss of Nelson was going to have a very negative effect on this team's strength- the passing game. Many said we could spread the ball around and replace his production, but for me, that wasn't the issue. You might be able to replace him statistically, but not his impact. We lost arguably one of the games top 5 wr's, and this teams premier deep threat. There isn't anyone on the roster who can replace what Jordy brought to the table, and the 'trickle down' pressure it's put on the group has proven-at least so far-unable to overcome. Opposing defenses jobs got a lot easier.
I think the passing game/route tree is too vanilla and predictable. Where are the routes with wr's crossing , the motion, the routes designed to clear out and create space? Too much is dependent on guys quickly winning one on one battles.
The big plays in the passing game are usually the result of 'sandlot' street ball types of plays when the initial routes don't work. As Denver showed, a really good D that can bring the heat and cover will take that away. And once that's gone, the Packers don't seem to have any answers or adjustments.
It's a long season, filled with peaks and valleys. No team can be at the top of their game every week, and sooner or later every team is gonna have a clunker like our team did the other night. It's one game in a marathon. I knew we were likely in for a long night when I learned the Broncos had their Super Bowl team and other franchise greats at the game to honor Pat Bowlen. Think the opener with Seattle last season; we were running into an emotional buzz saw.
That said, there are serious issues for this team to address, many of which were exposed in Denver.
I believe I posted at the beginning of the season that the loss of Nelson was going to have a very negative effect on this team's strength- the passing game. Many said we could spread the ball around and replace his production, but for me, that wasn't the issue. You might be able to replace him statistically, but not his impact. We lost arguably one of the games top 5 wr's, and this teams premier deep threat. There isn't anyone on the roster who can replace what Jordy brought to the table, and the 'trickle down' pressure it's put on the group has proven-at least so far-unable to overcome. Opposing defenses jobs got a lot easier.
I think the passing game/route tree is too vanilla and predictable. Where are the routes with wr's crossing , the motion, the routes designed to clear out and create space? Too much is dependent on guys quickly winning one on one battles.
The big plays in the passing game are usually the result of 'sandlot' street ball types of plays when the initial routes don't work. As Denver showed, a really good D that can bring the heat and cover will take that away. And once that's gone, the Packers don't seem to have any answers or adjustments.
OP
OP
rodell330
Cheesehead
Don't know who you're referring to but I post in chat, and I'm always posting in the threads. I'm not dreaming out because the offense had "one " bad game (which isn't accurate) I'm worried because they have looked bad the last 6 quarters they have played. There's no creativity and the run game has fallen off. Which means? More pressure on Rodgers and the passing game which in case you hadn't notice has fallen wayyy off. Oh and Rodgers has been visibly upset and pretty vocal about the inability for his Wrs to get seperation. We all know the guy isn't going to force the ball so something's got to give.
Not you
But horrible to me is a loss... We were 6-0... So while not greatest wins.. Still wins.
I guess if it was Denver 31 Packers 28.. It wouldn't be horrible? At least they score more than 20
That is how you make it sound
.
Vrill
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2011
- Messages
- 1,803
- Reaction score
- 137
A loss is a loss. It doesn't matter if its by 1 or 50. Either way, you need to make adjustments.
OP
OP
rodell330
Cheesehead
That's fine. But we looked horrible and lost so.... That's my point. We didn't lose 31-28 we got spanked and got outplayed in all aspect of the game . If it was that close this would be easier to digest because it would've at least meant we tried to compete ... idk what kind of team that was I saw Sunday Night. Looked unmotivated, disinterested, and unprepared point blank.
I remember a little over a year ago the Patriots were just slaughtered by the Chiefs like 41-14. They looked pathetic in every aspect. Bellichick was actually asked if they were going to evaluate the QB position.
Not that we are guaranteed to follow the same path but it just goes to show how ridiculous it is to overreact after one bad game.
Not that we are guaranteed to follow the same path but it just goes to show how ridiculous it is to overreact after one bad game.
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
The problem being that the offense has struggled for the better parts of three games in a row for now with the defense not being able to stop opponents over the last two games.
While the Packers won their first six games it was pretty obvious there are some issues needing to be solved.
Nor was the New England situation a 1 game occurrence as they had not played particularly well on the offensive side for the first quarter of that season.
While I'd agree there have been issues present the last 2 weeks there's certainly indications from early in the season that they are better than this.
20, 16, 14 points in three out of 4 games for NE last year... 14 was the KC game
OP
OP
rodell330
Cheesehead
I hate when people compare us to the Patriots. Two completely different styles in two completely different conferences.
Patriotplayer90
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2015
- Messages
- 1,874
- Reaction score
- 130
We don't exactly have a Gronkowski recovering from an injury and ready to break out, either.
Not sure what this has to do with the point since Gronk was healthy enough to play and productive all of last year.
No one said we were the Patriots. That wasn't the point. The point was good teams go through bad stretches where they don't look like themselves. That should have been obvious.
Example of good teams having a tough time
Capt said pack struggled on offense for three games..
Showed pats struggled too...
At some point, good teams on a successful run will hit a tough patch. What they're doing best gets figured out and countered, and they have to adjust. The Patriots are masters at this, and this is currently the challenge facing MM and his staff.
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
As another poster correctly pointed out Gronkowski was only nine months removed from an ACL and MCL tear once the 2014 season started. Once he got fully healthy the Patriots offense started to dominate. The Packers won´t get a similar boost for the rest of the season so we have to figure out a different way to get out of this slump.
The Packers are for sure a better team than their performance over the last two games might indicate. They will have to change something about their offense to scheme receivers open more often to be able to compete with elite defenses.
So missing Jordy (aka Gronk) can not be used to compare both offense issues?
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
That´s irrelevant as Nelson is out for the season and won´t be able to help the offense get out of their slump this year.
gopkrs
Cheesehead
- Joined
- May 12, 2014
- Messages
- 5,379
- Reaction score
- 1,279
I noticed (I think it was Jones) going semi deep along the left sideline. He was covered completely and he just stopped! Rodgers meanwhile was scrambling. Exactly why Jones did not start crossing over the middle or trying to make himself available for Rodgers is...a coaching problem? Receivers should be looking for an open space while Rodgers is scrambling. Maybe it is time to give Abederris a shot.
I hope he gets healthy fast, as I think he can be that difference maker. Not "THE" guy, but a difference maker none the less, even this year.
But a " unhealthy gronk" is an excuse for the three losses for NE?
Not trying to be a pain... But if people say NE had issues because Gronk was out or hurt why can't same argument be made with us missing Jordy
It's certainly a legitimate one to help explain our offensive struggles and why we should be better next year, just not one that can help us make the argument of why we'll turn it around offensively this year.
Similar threads
