This article nails it. People want to put 100 percent of the blame on Hundley, but the truth is that even Rodgers hasbeen struggling to move the ball outside of the red zone. He just can score TDs in the red zone unlike any QB in the history of the league, and doesn't put the team in tough positions via turnovers.
It looks like an offense designed by a stubborn old fool, attempting to fit square pegs into round holes, instead of utilizing the skillsets of the players. We had a WR in the backfield for many games, yet instead of utilizing his matchup advantage against LBs in coverage, he just ran draws until he went to the IR. Even Jones and Williams showed good his hand the ability to contribute in the passing game, yet generic 90s screens was the extent of their involvement.
He still can't find a way to get Cobb involved, after teams exposed that he wasn't great at separation during ISO routes. Even though Adams is very good at the catch point, he rarely seems to have much separation. Which is the issue. Either we have painfully slow WRs, or poorly designed routes which do not give them an advantage in coverage. Either way, it has made the job of the QB very difficult, while other OCs with better schemes have made the job for their QBs easier.
It's not as though the Packers have been incapable of running a ball control, move-the-chains passing offense when circumstances dictate. I've pointed out on several occasions the second half of the Dallas game followed by the Bears game in 2016. The passing offense had been struggling. Remember all of the "what's wrong with Rodgers?" chatter? I think Rodgers finished that Dallas game 14 of 15 or something of the sort. In the Bears game he set the franchise record for completions, going 39 of 56 for 326 yds, but for only 5.8 yds. per attempt and 8.4 yds. per completion. But it added up to 21 passing first downs and 39 minutes of possession. Montgomery had 10 and 9 catches in those two games, respectively.
Since they have not since gone back to this approach for a half let alone a full game, one can't help but think it was more getting back to basics to get some rhythm going rather than exploiting matchups.
I wouldn't necessarily lay all of the blame on McCarthy, however, in the Packers struggling between the 20's in recent years. As recently as two years ago, Rodgers stated that this is primarily a downfield passing team. There's been an inclination to just play their game, that game, and leave it to the defenses to find ways to stop it.
Will the playbook "scrub" lead to a more back-to-basics, West Coast-y, ball control approach when the opportunities present themselves?
I would observe that Philbin's last season with the Packers was the high flying 2011 year. Is that the magic they wish to recapture? The Packers have had various levels of interest in Robinson, Watkins and Matthews, three different kinds of WRs. Then the only free agent signing was the TE who plays primarily slot and wideout which suggests more of a ball control approach.
I don't think there is a coherent picture yet. Who they draft to take Nelson's spot might give us some indication. If they don't draft an evident replacement on day 1 or 2, that will tell us something else.
My guess is they will try to replace Nelson's characteristics: a big receiver with long speed to try to recapture some of the old magic where moving the ball between the 20's was done in chunks. He'd have to be a pretty darn good route runner from the get go for Rodgers to want to throw him the ball with any regularity. Replacing the 2011 version of Nelson with a rookie of any provenance is darn near impossible, but decent rookie production gets you somethin' somethin'.
I'd only hope what comes out of this is less stuboness about the "identity" and more opportunistic flexibility.
