Lions pre game chatter

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
4,894
Reaction score
949
After two hits and out with a concussion, and on top of the knee and hamstring injuries, I'm concerned that Watson is just too fragile for the NFL. Two concussions in two consecutive weeks is not good and he needs to think about his entire life. I want him to be successful. I'd rather see him stay healthy first.
 

captainWIMM

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
28,277
Reaction score
2,787
Lucky I’m not not one to fall for that. That stat is relative (check his snap counts). Curious here Why did you purposely pick 500 snaps? That’s 43% of his snap count. That would make a person scoring a 95% (A) on a test score 43%. (F) It’s a weighted/curved stat
(Eric had 1,138 snaps in 2020)

What??? You obviously didn't understand a whole lot of my post.

Even when taking a look at the percentage of missed tackles only seven inside linebackers who played at least 500 snaps (that's a pretty reasonable number as it's close to 50% of the snap count of the league leaders) had a higher one.

In addition, it doesn't make a whole lot of a difference using any other number of snaps played to compare him to other inside linebackers in run defense as he ends up on the bottom of it every single time.

Im curious why you sidestepped the original question with a misleading statement?
Name several players at LB that were MORE productive than Eric Wilson but considered “Middling or average” in 2020. Pick any MLB, RILB, LILB from ant team you wish. This should be an easy exercise if you claim he’s below average.

Names

Geez, do you want me to name 50 inside linebackers who had a better season than Wilson in 2020? I'm not gonna do that.

But once again, the Vikings not making any effort to bring him back after that year is actually all you need to know to figure out how well he played.
They didn't know if they would be able to successfully re-sign either Jones or Williams. They also didn't know if Jones or Williams would get hurt during the 2020 season.

Well, teams don't know if they will be able to re-sign any player heading towards free agency before they actually do it. In addition there's no way of predicting an injury to a player at any position.

That's a pretty weak argument to be made for using a second rounder on a backup.

I know you've never agreed with the Packers draft philosophy of looking forward one year and beyond but it's been the standard process of drafting for at least the last 15+ years. You look at the here and now, and the past but never to anything forward from today. Kind of like the Jags, Browns, Panthers, Lions & Jets.

Or kind of like the teams that have won the Super Bowl in past seasons. It seems to me the Packers prefer to plan for a future instead of focusing on the present.

FWIW, I thought drafting Dillon was an excellent decision by Gluten. They had Jones and Williams and knew they'd lose one of those guys. They kept Dillon, let Williams walk in FA, and even after today's game, it was the right decision.

It's a terrible idea to spend a second round pick on a backup running back. Period.
 

milani

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 11, 2012
Messages
1,874
Reaction score
423
I checked NFL stats and the Lions' run D is about as bad as ours. Seeing we had success running the ball against Buffalo last week I hope MLF sticks to that game plan today.
Since the Lions loaded the box we should have been able to hit some shots downfield without having to make spectacular catches.
 

kevans74

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 16, 2017
Messages
1,116
Reaction score
254
Location
USA
Since the Lions loaded the box we should have been able to hit some shots downfield without having to make spectacular catches.
Yeah AR has just been so off in most games this year to be totally honest. I think he's done or needs a change in scenery
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
27,734
Reaction score
5,289
Location
Madison, WI
Since the Lions loaded the box we should have been able to hit some shots downfield without having to make spectacular catches.
When you can't even complete a pass to a wide open David Bakhtiari in the endzone, hitting shots downfield is hard to fathom. Rodgers hasn't had any luck this year with longshots and because of that, they seem to just end up being drive stoppers.

What I would really love to know is how many called plays this season are being audibled out of by Rodgers. Feels like the opposing defense knows what plays the Packer offense is running on a lot of the downs.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
4,894
Reaction score
949
When you can't even complete a pass to a wide open David Bakhtiari in the endzone, hitting shots downfield is hard to fathom. Rodgers hasn't had any luck this year with longshots and because of that, they seem to just end up being drive stoppers.

What I would really love to know is how many called plays this season are being audibled out of by Rodgers. Feels like the opposing defense knows what plays the Packer offense is running on a lot of the downs.
That's a good point. Detroit had the worst D in the NFL before the Packers' game. But the Packers couldn't get a run game going (granted, they only ran 20 times, passed for over double that number). Most carries were for two or three yards, or stopped at the LOS. I think any 6 big bodies can stop a run, if they know it's coming, to your point.

On long passes, I don't know if Rodgers is losing his touch, or if guys just aren't running routes properly. Probably both. But twice yesterday, Rodgers targeted Watkins in the end zone, and in both cases Watkins cut in toward the middle and Rodgers passed to the end of the end zone. The game ended on a play like that. I get that Watkins is new to the system, but that's not an excuse, especially after 8 games. TJ Hockenson didn't have any trouble getting his routes right in Minnesota, with what, three days of prep? It's maddening.
 
Last edited:

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
27,734
Reaction score
5,289
Location
Madison, WI
On long passes, I don't know if Rodgers is losing his touch, or if guys just aren't running routes properly. Probably both. But twice yesterday, Rodgers targeted Watkins in the end zone, and in both cases Watkins cut in toward the middle and Rodgers passed to the end of the end zone. The game ended on a play like that. I get that Watkins is new to the system, but that's not an excuse, especially after 8 games. TJ Hockenson didn't have any trouble getting his routes right in Minnesota, with what, three days of prep? It's maddening.
I think this is and always will be one of the biggest knocks on Rodgers, his seemingly slow chemistry build with receivers. I can't think of 1 receiver, rookie or veteran, that Rodgers had pretty quick chemistry with. Then you take into account talent level or lack thereof, of said receiver and it complicates things further.

I understand the need for reps with new guys, to establish this chemistry. However, when you skip OT's and don't play one down in preseason, it is easy to understand why 9 games into a Season, Rodgers and his receivers still don't seem to be on the same page.
 

gopkrs

Cheesehead
Joined
May 12, 2014
Messages
4,264
Reaction score
684
Since the Lions loaded the box we should have been able to hit some shots downfield without having to make spectacular catches.
Rodgers has not been able to throw deep well this season yet. And sometimes just throws into coverage deep and hopes he gets bailed out.
 

gopkrs

Cheesehead
Joined
May 12, 2014
Messages
4,264
Reaction score
684
After two hits and out with a concussion, and on top of the knee and hamstring injuries, I'm concerned that Watson is just too fragile for the NFL. Two concussions in two consecutive weeks is not good and he needs to think about his entire life. I want him to be successful. I'd rather see him stay healthy first.
Are there different kinds of helmets? His head does seem fragile. Or did they bring him back too early from a week ago?
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
27,734
Reaction score
5,289
Location
Madison, WI
Are there different kinds of helmets? His head does seem fragile. Or did they bring him back too early from a week ago?
So far, it hasn't just been his head. He had the knee issue before August and then the thigh/hamstring issue in Sept.

I hope he is just having bad luck in regards to injuries and he will eventually stay healthier for more than a play or 2.

Also, I am guessing that by playing in the Missouri Valley Football Conference, he didn't get hit by as many large, athletic players as the NFL has. So far he has been a major disappointment, but I wasn't expecting too much out of him as a rookie either.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
4,894
Reaction score
949
I think this is and always will be one of the biggest knocks on Rodgers, his seemingly slow chemistry build with receivers. I can't think of 1 receiver, rookie or veteran, that Rodgers had pretty quick chemistry with. Then you take into account talent level or lack thereof, of said receiver and it complicates things further.

I understand the need for reps with new guys, to establish this chemistry. However, when you skip OT's and don't play one down in preseason, it is easy to understand why 9 games into a Season, Rodgers and his receivers still don't seem to be on the same page.
Another good point. I don't recall hearing about this long time to build chemistry between a QB/WR anywhere else. It depends on the QB, but Rodgers must be a pain in the *** to work with. Don't get me wrong, he's a great QB and has been great for GB. I guess I'm still not over the fact that a team a lot of us thought would get to the SB will be going home after game 17.
Rodgers has not been able to throw deep well this season yet. And sometimes just throws into coverage deep and hopes he gets bailed out.
It does seem like he throws long on occasion in the area of a receiver (and defenders). The passes are like mini Hail Marys. Are his receivers THAT bad, and/or has Rodgers deteriorated THAT much in one year?
Are there different kinds of helmets? His head does seem fragile. Or did they bring him back too early from a week ago?
Yeah there are the helmets they wore in the PS. Looked like a regular helmet but with a lot of padding on it. Aesthetically they're not very cool. but who cares if they can slow CTE?
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
4,894
Reaction score
949
Well that's on you and those who thought it. ;)
I guess so. Personally, I underestimated the impact a weak receiving group would have on the Packers. I also hold Rodgers at least partially responsible for mostly blaming anyone other than himself. He'll grudgingly admit he has to play "a tick" better, but some of the throws I saw yesterday needed more that "a tick" of improvement.

And why wouldn't he at least be communicating with the veteran guys? On two occasions yesterday he and Watkins had different ideas about where the ball was gonna be thrown. That I'll put on Watkins. If he had cut to the edge of the end zone on the last play instead of cutting inside, he would probably have caught the winning touchdown. OK, he would have had a chance. :cool:

I've reduced my expectations. Beat the Cowboys and beat the Vikings. I know, it should have started with beat the Commanders and beat the Lions.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
27,734
Reaction score
5,289
Location
Madison, WI
And why wouldn't he at least be communicating with the veteran guys?
Honestly, I don't think it really matters whether it is a veteran guy or not, it just Rodgers time to trust them and get on the same page. We don't have a ton of data on this in regards to WR's but there have been at least 3 veteran TE's (Cook, Bennett and Graham), that we do have data on and it took some time for them to become reliable targets. I suppose a veteran like Sammy Watkins should have better route running skills than say rookies Doubs or Watson, but it sure doesn't seem to correlate to success with Rodgers.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
4,894
Reaction score
949
Honestly, I don't think it really matters whether it is a veteran guy or not, it just Rodgers time to trust them and get on the same page. We don't have a ton of data on this in regards to WR's but there have been at least 3 veteran TE's (Cook, Bennett and Graham), that we do have data on and it took some time for them to become reliable targets. I suppose a veteran like Sammy Watkins should have better route running skills than say rookies Doubs or Watson, but it sure doesn't seem to correlate to success with Rodgers.
Yeah that makes sense. He likes to keep his INTs to a minimum (well, except against the Lions....) and so throws to guys he feels "get it". I understand that takes time, but Rodgers seems to take longer than any other QB. Cousins and TJ Hockensack had no trouble yesterday.
 

milani

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 11, 2012
Messages
1,874
Reaction score
423
Another good point. I don't recall hearing about this long time to build chemistry between a QB/WR anywhere else. It depends on the QB, but Rodgers must be a pain in the *** to work with. Don't get me wrong, he's a great QB and has been great for GB. I guess I'm still not over the fact that a team a lot of us thought would get to the SB will be going home after game 17.

It does seem like he throws long on occasion in the area of a receiver (and defenders). The passes are like mini Hail Marys. Are his receivers THAT bad, and/or has Rodgers deteriorated THAT much in one year?

Yeah there are the helmets they wore in the PS. Looked like a regular helmet but with a lot of padding on it. Aesthetically they're not very cool. but who cares if they can slow CTE?
I always thought Favre developed faster chemistry with his receivers and he went through so many names that most fans cannot remember.
 

captainWIMM

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
28,277
Reaction score
2,787
Since the Lions loaded the box we should have been able to hit some shots downfield without having to make spectacular catches.

It's tough to complete deep passes when receivers run wrong routes or don't get open.

Honestly, I don't think it really matters whether it is a veteran guy or not, it just Rodgers time to trust them and get on the same page. We don't have a ton of data on this in regards to WR's but there have been at least 3 veteran TE's (Cook, Bennett and Graham), that we do have data on and it took some time for them to become reliable targets. I suppose a veteran like Sammy Watkins should have better route running skills than say rookies Doubs or Watson, but it sure doesn't seem to correlate to success with Rodgers.

Jared Cook had 42 receptions for 553 yards and three touchdowns in the final 10 games of the 2016 season after playing in only three games early in the season because of an injury. It didn't take Rodgers long to build chemistry with him. Maybe the Packers not signing any talented veteran receivers during his tenure as the starting quarterback is the main reason it has taken him long to trust most of his passing targets.

Watkins is the only one to blame for running the wrong route twice in the end zone vs. the Lions. He would have been wide open on both plays at the spot Rodgers threw to if he just ran the correct route.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
4,894
Reaction score
949
If passes were not under thrown
Or over thrown. One consistent theme, aside from losing, is that Rodgers' passes have been way off target. Some of the blame can go to the receivers but not all. Of more concern is Rodgers missing WRs wide open. It happened Sunday, again. The team is in disarray and there's plenty of blame to go around.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
10,390
Reaction score
3,010
I checked NFL stats and the Lions' run D is about as bad as ours. Seeing we had success running the ball against Buffalo last week I hope MLF sticks to that game plan today.
I wish you would’ve been correct. It seems we’ve ignored the Running game once again, especially at Goal line. No team in the NFL has less Rushes for a TD than the GB Packers. While we probably have one of the better RB rooms in the League.
It’s Just a mystery why this wasn’t part of our regular game plan until we got the Receivers healthy or acclimated.
 

milani

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 11, 2012
Messages
1,874
Reaction score
423
I wish you would’ve been correct. It seems we’ve ignored the Running game once again, especially at Goal line. No team in the NFL has less Rushes for a TD than the GB Packers. While we probably have one of the better RB rooms in the League.
It’s Just a mystery why this wasn’t part of our regular game plan until we got the Receivers healthy or acclimated.
It certainly is a mystery. But then again when you are inside the 10 yard line even good running backs need some help from the other 10 players on the field. Lombardi once said Paul Hornung was the best RB he ever saw inside the 10 yard line. But look at the cast he had to help get him into the end zone.
 
OP
OP
longtimefan

longtimefan

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
23,810
Reaction score
2,997
Location
Milwaukee
Or over thrown. One consistent theme, aside from losing, is that Rodgers' passes have been way off target. Some of the blame can go to the receivers but not all. Of more concern is Rodgers missing WRs wide open. It happened Sunday, again. The team is in disarray and there's plenty of blame to go around.
All over radio shows here . One huge rodgers fan Steve Czban. He is so loyal to Rodgers is crazy

But as he says he is ready to give up.

He went off about the game tape on how Rodgers isn’t seeing open wr in a CLEAN POCKET. he gave one play example where he described the entire play. Have to remember he is a huge Rodgers fan . He doesn’t know why rodgers is playing the way he is

He admits wr play can be blamed . But the examples he gave he can’t blame the wr at all as they were open

Time for people to realize something is wrong
 

Mondio

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
14,782
Reaction score
2,750
I wish you would’ve been correct. It seems we’ve ignored the Running game once again, especially at Goal line. No team in the NFL has less Rushes for a TD than the GB Packers. While we probably have one of the better RB rooms in the League.
It’s Just a mystery why this wasn’t part of our regular game plan until we got the Receivers healthy or acclimated.
Did you miss 1st and 3rd down runs from like the 1 and we lost yards on that?
 
OP
OP
longtimefan

longtimefan

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
23,810
Reaction score
2,997
Location
Milwaukee
Or over thrown. One consistent theme, aside from losing, is that Rodgers' passes have been way off target. Some of the blame can go to the receivers but not all. Of more concern is Rodgers missing WRs wide open. It happened Sunday, again. The team is in disarray and there's plenty of blame to go around.
I’ve said it in 19 and this year

Some is wr blame but when there is a clean pocket no excuse why he doesn’t see 2 open receivers
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
10,390
Reaction score
3,010
Did you miss 1st and 3rd down runs from like the 1 and we lost yards on that?
No. I was too busy being blinded by the Interceptions.
We should’ve ran that Ball 3 Times on both series and kicked A FG of scored a TD
 

Members online

Top