I am excited to see this kid zing the ball, he can throw. I figure there will be a learning curve, but there is a lot of potential on this team yet. If the defense out performs Barry, there is a chance we could be talking about extra games when all is said and done. The offense will look different that's for sure. Doubs gets a little stronger to the ball and with it, Watson stays healthy, 2 new TE's who have much more potential than we've had in a while, there's a lot to look forward to. I'm most concerned with turnovers from the QB position as he's learning. If he can limit those, who knows.
It’s now OFFICIAL!!! Rodgers has been traded to the Jets.
- Thread starter PackAttack12
- Start date
OldSchool101
Pack
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2014
- Messages
- 14,297
- Reaction score
- 5,686
Those are Some really good points
What I see when Rodgers ran our Offense is a QB that runs a derivative of its intended purpose. We know for a fact that Rodgers was given some leash, which I don’t necessarily have a problem with that, if it’s effective. (which for awhile it was). That said, one of the positive components of Matt’s Offense is it is robust. It doesn’t necessarily require a HOF level QB to run it effectively. It’s setup where a good game manager can come in and run it effectively. I’m not suggesting we don’t want a HOF QB either, just that it’s not required.
The issue with giving the QB complete control (verses staying close to design script) is once a QB plays more to using HIS style over play design, he sacrifices that robust feature which relies on ALL the components involved equally and produces consistency. We witnessed how volatile it became when that QB consistency waned.
I say Let’s run this Show the way it was intended and see if Matt’s Design works or not. That takes a sprinkle of patience and faith in our Coach and to let this season develop. MLF waited 3+ years to fully implement HIS concept and imo Matt has earned that respect and right (the same way as Aaron earned his respect and right to deviate)….
… by producing Wins
What I see when Rodgers ran our Offense is a QB that runs a derivative of its intended purpose. We know for a fact that Rodgers was given some leash, which I don’t necessarily have a problem with that, if it’s effective. (which for awhile it was). That said, one of the positive components of Matt’s Offense is it is robust. It doesn’t necessarily require a HOF level QB to run it effectively. It’s setup where a good game manager can come in and run it effectively. I’m not suggesting we don’t want a HOF QB either, just that it’s not required.
The issue with giving the QB complete control (verses staying close to design script) is once a QB plays more to using HIS style over play design, he sacrifices that robust feature which relies on ALL the components involved equally and produces consistency. We witnessed how volatile it became when that QB consistency waned.
I say Let’s run this Show the way it was intended and see if Matt’s Design works or not. That takes a sprinkle of patience and faith in our Coach and to let this season develop. MLF waited 3+ years to fully implement HIS concept and imo Matt has earned that respect and right (the same way as Aaron earned his respect and right to deviate)….
… by producing Wins
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
Of course, I'm not the one starting the discussions about Rodgers though.
I'm truly devastated
The Packers decided it was time to move on from Rodgers because they would have to pay him an additional $60 million to play this season. If it would have been significantly cheaper to retain him for 2023 he would still be on the roster.
Actually, I'm most likely the one poster who tries to support his opinion with facts most often. Therefore I'm definitely not the one repeating my opinion without providing new information or evidence.
To the point you made, despite the Chiefs throwing more passes than the Packers KC's receivers (300 targets, 65.3% completion percentage) still were targeted less often than Green Bay's (327, 61.2) resulting in a higher completion percentage. On the other hand the Chiefs' running backs (108 targets) were targeted nearly as often as the Packers (115), so that doesn't end up being a factor either.
It's not surprising that Mahomes first read is to throw the ball to Kelce on a lot of plays as he's a dominant tight end, automatically resulting in the receivers getting less targets. With that being said I'm not arguing KC's receivers are elite by any means but they were better than the Packers' last year.
Of course a team having a dominant pass catcher needs other weapons as well. But in general that don't receive as many targets as on a team without an elite receiver or tight end.
As a side note, in the post you quoted I literally mention Rodgers deserves part of the blame for playoff losses as well as not performing up to potential last year. But as predicted you completely ignored it once again.
Last edited by a moderator:
OldSchool101
Pack
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2014
- Messages
- 14,297
- Reaction score
- 5,686
There was much talk about importance at TE when our current system came to GB. While I respected Tonyan and Lewis, I never thought they were “dynamic” players who could excel at all phases. If anything I see those 2 as leaning more 1-dimensional.
I’m really excited to see this TE room develop over the next couple of seasons. We’ve got a really good chance for 1 or 2 of our TE group rising to production heights we haven’t seen since Paul Coffman type days.
I’m really excited to see this TE room develop over the next couple of seasons. We’ve got a really good chance for 1 or 2 of our TE group rising to production heights we haven’t seen since Paul Coffman type days.
Pokerbrat2000
Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
While I think Tonyan was a decent TE, he by no means would be one I consider above average. I also don't think that the Bears overpaid for him with the $2.65M, 1 year deal. That said, I really like that the Packers drafted Musgrave and Kraft, as well as signing UDFA Camren McDonald. I can see these 3 guys bonding, competing and giving Love and the Packers a really impressive TE room in a year or 2. Deguara and Davis are also going to be pushed a lot harder, just to make the roster. Healthy competition and young talent, love it and we are seeing the same thing at WR.
You must be logged in to see this image or video!
OldSchool101
Pack
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2014
- Messages
- 14,297
- Reaction score
- 5,686
I like what we’ve done developing at WR, so I’m pretty confident Reed will be deemed as starting level WR pretty early on.
I think I’ve seen enough from Watson and Doubs to safely say they will transition. Doubs looks 50% Romeo and moves 25% Driver 25% Jennings. I’ve seen both of those players styles in the way Doubs moves and he’s very reminiscent of past Pro level guys we’ve witnessed.
Watson will just flat outrun you and his 4.36 40 times transitions into pads. He makes a 4.55 Safety appear slow. He possess BOTH short and long speed, which puts his NFL floor very high. He won last year with athleticism, just wait until he learns nuances of better route running etc.
I see Musgrave with the Receiving potential to give us some flavor of a young Jimmy Graham. Obviously we don’t know where his ceiling is or if he’s used in that same heavy Receiver capacity (Brees etc)
Last edited:
Pokerbrat2000
Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
After watching his rookie highlights, I'm even more excited about his upside. #12 and #10 looked pretty good throwing to him too.
You must be logged in to see this image or video!
Yeah, this doesn't feel like those McCarthy era teams, where if you took the top guy out (Favre or Rodgers), the whole thing collapsed. Rodgers had an off year last season, so it's not like Love even has an insurmountable standard to play up to.
The injury also prevented the Packers offense from doing basic things such as operating out of center. Sure, they still went under center - not all snaps were out of shotgun. But, per Sports Info Solutions, the Packers had the fewest under-center dropbacks and handoffs since Matt LaFleur became head coach in 2019. Prior to last season, the Packers averaged 141 dropbacks and 273 handoffs from under center - they had 116 and 214, respectively, in 2022.
OldSchool101
Pack
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2014
- Messages
- 14,297
- Reaction score
- 5,686
You must be logged in to see this image or video!
It definitely was not light pressure on that Watson crosser against the Eagles. There was a traditional 7 in the box
It was more good blocking and a good, faster timed throw
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
While Rodgers didn't perform up to potential last season the numbers he put up would still be impressive for a first year starter.
Well, we'll see if he's an impressive first year starter or not.
Pokerbrat2000
Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Love is also not being paid what Rodgers or many NFL starters are being paid. People expecting the 2023 Love to put up numbers like Rodgers "off years", are probably going to be disappointed.
OldSchool101
Pack
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2014
- Messages
- 14,297
- Reaction score
- 5,686
We might end up mixing in slightly more pitches and designed QB Runs (option) plus leaning slightly more on our ground n pound for Love’s first season. Just my guess
That said I think it’s reasonable that Love throws for 3,500+ yards/24TD’+ area (200 yards,1-2 passing TD’s/game) which is pretty respectable
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
If Love puts up those numbers he would come pretty close to matching the ones Rodgers did last season. I'm not optimistic about that happening. In addition I expect him to turn the ball over more often as well as completing a lesser percentage of his attempts.
Firethorn1001
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2015
- Messages
- 1,527
- Reaction score
- 1,081
Rodgers tweaking his calf at OTAs has a little bit of forum material for everyone.
If you hate OTAs : "See, this is why OTAs are bad!"
If you hate Rodgers : "Glad he got injured!"
If you love Rodgers : "Oh no! He got injured"
If you love OTAs : "Why did Rodgers never show for our OTAs!"
If you hate the Jets : "Haha!"
If you love the Jets : "Oh no!"
Mix and match as needed. Love OTAs, hate the Jets and hate Rodgers? "Haha! Glad he got injured, but why did Rodgers never show for our OTAs". Rinse/Repeat.
If you hate OTAs : "See, this is why OTAs are bad!"
If you hate Rodgers : "Glad he got injured!"
If you love Rodgers : "Oh no! He got injured"
If you love OTAs : "Why did Rodgers never show for our OTAs!"
If you hate the Jets : "Haha!"
If you love the Jets : "Oh no!"
Mix and match as needed. Love OTAs, hate the Jets and hate Rodgers? "Haha! Glad he got injured, but why did Rodgers never show for our OTAs". Rinse/Repeat.
Last edited:
Pokerbrat2000
Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Saw that Rodgers tweaked an ankle/calf and figured that would fuel the fire of "see this is why he shouldn't attend OTA's!" If that is the case, no starters should attend OTA's and probably shouldn't practice or play in any meaningless games. Wrapem' in bubble wrap and keep them on the shelf!
An injury during OTA's to even a starting QB, doesn't change my mind as to their importance to the entire team and coaches. Was glad to see Rodgers attending the Jets OTA's and I would imagine that whatever he tweaked, he will be fine by Sept.
Also, keep in mind that Rodgers could have just attended and not participated during OTA's. Karma is a real...
Last edited:
AmishMafia
Cheesehead
A few from column A and a few from column B.
Like to add:
If you are an AR realist: "I see Rodgers is working on his excuse for the upcoming season."
If you are an AR supporter: "Great! Now that ARs thumb got better, we have an excuse!"
We definitely want Rodgers healthy this season so he can get his 65% of snaps or whatever it is. We want that first round pick. I know it's just a tweak, but injuries have a way of piling up.
We could have replaced Rodgers with any quarterback on the planet, and we'd have to get used to him throwing more interceptions than Rodgers (although he wasn't at his best last season). That is something I'm definitely going to miss, for the most part, you didn't have to worry about him throwing picks.
Pokerbrat2000
Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
While I agree that Rodgers was a guy you could usually count on for protecting the ball, there were times where I think he was a bit too over protective with it. Sometimes in situations where the Packers needed a first down, instead of throwing up a 50/50 ball, he would either take a sack or throw it away.
This is why Rodgers, as great as he was, was never in the top 3 in passing yards in any NFL season.
Oh sure, I agree with that. The more cynical might say he was trying to protect his stats.
AmishMafia
Cheesehead
We went from one extreme to the other. Favre chucked it up there and hoped his receiver could make a play. Way too careless for my taste. Rodgers was only a bit too conservative. Not enough for me to complain. I am was much closer to Rodgers than Favre in ball security.
Rodgers fans have to be concerned with this injury. How can he possible tweak an ankle while learning how to huddle? Which has been stated that is all they do in OTAs.
Last edited:
