Rodgers against top defenses

[Un4GivN]

Here's a link to this year's ranking with the Panthers currently the best team in the league. You can use ESPN to figure out the top 5 for the last eight years.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/passing/sort/quarterbackRating/position/defense



What about the best team in the AFC to actually win the Lombardi Trophy??? I guess you're ignoring his performance in the Super Bowl cause it doesn't fit your assumption.

Thank you, And no i am not... I already pointed out his brilliance in that game a few post back. That is the one game I will give him. Even though Troy P was hobbled, he had some INCREDIBLE throws in that game. That seam to Jennings, the short post on 3rd and long. It was a masterpiece.

 

[I asked LT to delete my acct]

What about the best team in the AFC to actually win the Lombardi Trophy??? I guess you're ignoring his performance in the Super Bowl cause it doesn't fit your assumption.

In fairness here Capt, he has only won one.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I concede defeat, the sad part to me is that you guys are so enthralled in trying to prove your point you don't see the other side.
There are exceptions as with everything. And yes he has good games, but overall... I'm not nearly as impressed as much most of Packer nation.

I guess at the end of the day, throw stats out the window and ask yourself. If you are an NFL GM/coach what QB do you want out there leading your team? Personally, I'm pretty satisfied with AR in Green and Gold. Without him, we are a .500 team at best, with him, we are 6-1.

 

[Croak]

Thank you, And no i am not... I already pointed out his brilliance in that game a few post back. That is the one game I will give him. Even though Troy P was hobbled, he had some INCREDIBLE throws in that game. That seem to Jennings, the short post on 3rd and long. It was a masterpiece.

Your real name wouldn't happen to be Valyncia Jennings would it? No offense, just foolin' with ya to lighten things up a little.

 

[I asked LT to delete my acct]

Your real name wouldn't happen to be Valyncia Jennings would it? No offense, just foolin' with ya to lighten things up a little.

We`re not here to be friendly .............(only joking )

 

[Un4GivN]

Your real name wouldn't happen to be Valyncia Jennings would it? No offense, just foolin' with ya to lighten things up a little.

Lol maybe.... How did you know!?!

Jk, reality is Rodgers is great in a lot of ways. And as someone pointed out. There is only 1 quarterback that I feel is better than him currently in the NFL. And I also think as fans we are very lucky to have 20 years of HoF quarterbacks.

I don't mean to offend anyone's values or anything like that! Ill have my Green n Gold on this Sunday just like the rest of the supporters. That won't change if the team is 6-1 or 1-6 (Yes I was her for the Magic Man days and before)

But I also think there is something to be said for some of his more recent performances especially when facing adverse conditions or truly great defenses. (Which the Broncos definitely are).

It isn't so much that he played bad... But how he did it. So disappointing to watch what is widely considered one of the best QB ever pack in after a half. Look frustrated and not even taking the chance to win.

Watching Luck down by 17 on Monday and never give up was a sight to see. Made it worse. Watching Luck push to go on 4th down. And continuing to pass down the field even though he couldn't hit the broad side of a barn on some of those throws. I'd really like to see that from Rodgers.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

In fairness here Capt, he has only won one.

True, this is the entire team's fault though.

 

[easyk83]

Ok if that is your point what is Rodgers QBR vs Tampa... Isn't that a pure cover two when he played them? I'm pretty sure the Giants who decimated us multiple times in the playoffs (Including sadly one time when I was in Lambeau) ran mostly 4 man rush, zone behind at the time. I don't get what your point is. That he sucks vs both if they are talented. I would agree.

My point is that while the Packer passing attack is effective against good zone cover teams that it struggles against good bump n run teams. More on this later.

How is that a point for you? Even if your point was valid, how is it not every bit as much his fault as the OC. He's the NFL MVP if he has an idea to fix it they would incorporate it. But he doesn't... Or did and it didn't work. That's not a point for you just shows failure no matter how you put it. Not to mention it has already been said Rodgers has full control at the line. If he wants something else he can do whatever he wants.

My point is valid and Rodgers is partly to blame for that. But "Green Bay runs a flawed scheme," is different from Rodgers "***** the bed," isn't it?

My last point to this is I still believe it has more to do with personnel... I bet if you look at his BEST games of all time they are mix of man and zone schemes. Not just one or another. But the common denominator being the defenses skill. Just as the common denominator in his bad games are defensive skill. Not scheme. Players make plays. No scheme is designed with no one to be open vs a zone or man. If so that is the worst scheme of all time and EVERYONE in the organization should be fired for running a scheme that doesnt work vs 50 percent of the league. To me that is just a lie people tell themselves to feel better about players actions.

And that Steelers Super Bowl defense wasn't loaded with talent? They were very talented, it's just that they played a scheme that the Packer offense matched up against. We were able to spread out their zone D and take away most of their strengths. They weren't able to bunch up their D and fire blitzes up and down our Offensive front. More on this in bit.

I haven't the foggiest, I'm a hardcore Woodson fan but I sadly don't remember all packer stats by game back to 2006. That was a long long time ago.

New Orleans never allowed Harris or Woodson to play bum n run. They ran bunch sets crossing routes and rubs all game long and forced our guys to play off and away from their strengths. In contrast the Packer spread ISO attack allows good cover corners to play up on our guys and basically mug them. Against less talented man cover units it still works great, but against the best cover units our guys get shut down. My whole point is that scheme is a big factor in our big game struggles and that the Packer offense needs to commit itself more to scheming guys open rather than letting them get crushed on the field.

 

[I asked LT to delete my acct]

True, this is the entire team's fault though.

Actually you make a fair point, although winning was the whole teams contribution, not just his.

 

[Patriotplayer90]

Lol maybe.... How did you know!?!

Jk, reality is Rodgers is great in a lot of ways. And as someone pointed out. There is only 1 quarterback that I feel is better than him currently in the NFL. And I also think as fans we are very lucky to have 20 years of HoF quarterbacks.

I don't mean to offend anyone's values or anything like that! Ill have my Green n Gold on this Sunday just like the rest of the supporters. That won't change if the team is 6-1 or 1-6 (Yes I was her for the Magic Man days and before)

But I also think there is something to be said for some of his more recent performances especially when facing adverse conditions or truly great defenses. (Which the Broncos definitely are).

It isn't so much that he played bad... But how he did it. So disappointing to watch what is widely considered one of the best QB ever pack in after a half. Look frustrated and not even taking the chance to win.

Watching Luck down by 17 on Monday and never give up was a sight to see. Made it worse. Watching Luck push to go on 4th down. And continuing to pass down the field even though he couldn't hit the broad side of a barn on some of those throws. I'd really like to see that from Rodgers.

He should be frustrated. They have a perennial All Pro QB and surround him with OK talent, OK coaches, and an OK system.

They use 1st round picks each year on defensive players and their defense always gets dismantled by an offense with a pulse and falls apart when it matters most. Meanwhile, they put short, 4.6 40 yard guys like Adams, Jones, Boykin, Montgomery, etc. Around him and expect him to be able to find them open in man coverage. It doesn't take a genius to realize that size/speed is a desirable trait in a WR.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

He should be frustrated. They have a perennial All Pro QB and surround him with OK talent, OK coaches, and an OK system.

They use 1st round picks each year on defensive players and their defense always gets dismantled by an offense with a pulse and falls apart when it matters most. Meanwhile, they put short, 4.6 40 yard guys like Adams, Jones, Boykin, Montgomery, etc. Around him and expect him to be able to find them open in man coverage. It doesn't take a genius to realize that size/speed is a desirable trait in a WR.

"OK" I get it, you are on post #12 and don't quite know the Packer players or system.

Define "short" in regards to WR's

Nelson: 6' 3"
Montgomery: 6' 2"
Adams: 6' 2"
Jones: 6' 1"
Janis: 6' 3"
Abbrederis: 6' 2"

FYI....Jarrett Boykin is not a Packer anymore and is a FA

I will give you Cobb at 5' 10", but for a slot receiver, this isn't short

 

[Patriotplayer90]

"OK" I get it, you are on post #12 and don't quite know the Packer players or system.

Define "short" in regards to WR's

Nelson: 6' 3"
Montgomery: 6' 2"
Adams: 6' 2"
Jones: 6' 1"

I will give you Cobb at 5' 10", but for a slot receiver, this isn't short

Montgomery was measured at 6' at the combine, and Adams was 6'1. That's too short for possession-receiver type speed, IMO.

 

[Un4GivN]

My point is that while the Packer passing attack is effective against good zone cover teams that it struggles against good bump n run teams. More on this later.

I don't entirely agree with this... Aaron has struggle against 2 high zone. Maybe not as much, but I think it is a cause and effect case. If you have two great corners to lock down the outside why would you play zone? The better corners all play mostly man.... Sherman, Norman, Revis in his Prime, Deon... Its the fact you have the talent to support that type of defense.

My point is valid and Rodgers is partly to blame for that. But "Green Bay runs a flawed scheme," is different from Rodgers "***** the bed," isn't it?

Rodgers is the scheme is my point... You think he has no say? That he doesn't get input into the game plan, route running, and everything in possible in the offense? If not he needs to speak up, because you hear about Tom Brady consistently adding to gameplans minutes before game time. And if the front office is too stubborn to listen then yes, I would take that off him. But I really feel he is as much part of gameplanning as anyone.

And that Steelers Super Bowl defense wasn't loaded with talent? They were very talented, it's just that they played a scheme that the Packer offense matched up against. We were able to spread out their zone D and take away most of their strengths. They weren't able to bunch up their D and fire blitzes up and down our Offensive front. More on this in bit.

Loaded? I guess that depends on your definition of "loaded". They were exceptional at stopping the run. But The DPOY was certainly hurt, and Rodgers played lights out. There is no doubting that. But the play I remember the most of that entire game was man to man... Jennings post on third down, and man to man Nelson for the his score down the sidelines. I'm sure they played zone but some of the best offensive plays in that game were made against man to man.

New Orleans never allowed Harris or Woodson to play bum n run. They ran bunch sets crossing routes and rubs all game long and forced our guys to play off and away from their strengths. In contrast the Packer spread ISO attack allows good cover corners to play up on our guys and basically mug them. Against less talented man cover units it still works great, but against the best cover units our guys get shut down. My whole point is that scheme is a big factor in our big game struggles and that the Packer offense needs to commit itself more to scheming guys open rather than letting them get crushed on the field.

This I don't have much to say to... Besides, Woodson for all the love I have for him, is no Sherman, Revis, Sanders type. That wasn't how he played the game. And Al Harris wasn't better that is for sure. Woodson made his living on being in the right place at the right time. INT's, strip fumbles, blitzing, run stopping, and things like that. I don't think I would ever consider him a shutdown corner. I can't even count how many times those two got burnt on double moves and then decided to tackle the receiver to save a touchdown. One of my favorites of all time but I don't think that is a far comparison.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Montgomery was measured at 6' at the combine, and Adams was 6'1. That's too short for possession-receiver type speed, IMO.

Ok, lets talk height and a team you probably think is better and perhaps more familiar with....the Patriots:

Amendola: 5' 11"
Dobson: 6' 3"
Edelman: 5' 10"
LaFell: 6' 3"
Martin: 5' 11"
Slater: 6'

Am I missing something?

 

[Un4GivN]

Montgomery was measured at 6' at the combine, and Adams was 6'1. That's too short for possession-receiver type speed, IMO.

Edelman 5'10
Sanders 5'11
Brown 5'10
ODB 6'

Height means nothing... Not the size of the dog in the fight. Its the size of the fight in the dog.

Granted its nice having a Nelson at 6'3" but its not needed.... Some of the best receivers in the league don't touch 6'

 

[easyk83]

I don't entirely agree with this... Aaron has struggle against 2 high zone. Maybe not as much, but I think it is a cause and effect case. If you have two great corners to lock down the outside why would you play zone? The better corners all play mostly man.... Sherman, Norman, Revis in his Prime, Deon... Its the fact you have the talent to support that type of defense.


Rodgers is the scheme is my point... You think he has no say? That he doesn't get input into the game plan, route running, and everything in possible in the offense? If not he needs to speak up, because you hear about Tom Brady consistently adding to gameplans minutes before game time. And if the front office is too stubborn to listen then yes, I would take that off him. But I really feel he is as much part of gameplanning as anyone.



Loaded? I guess that depends on your definition of "loaded". They were exceptional at stopping the run. But The DPOY was certainly hurt, and Rodgers played lights out. There is no doubting that. But the play I remember the most of that entire game was man to man... Jennings post on third down, and man to man Nelson for the his score down the sidelines. I'm sure they played zone but some of the best offensive plays in that game were made against man to man.



This I don't have much to say to... Besides, Woodson for all the love I have for him, is no Sherman, Revis, Sanders type. That wasn't how he played the game. And Al Harris wasn't better that is for sure. Woodson made his living on being in the right place at the right time. INT's, strip fumbles, blitzing, run stopping, and things like that. I don't think I would ever consider him a shutdown corner. I can't even count how many times those two got burnt on double moves and then decided to tackle the receiver to save a touchdown. One of my favorites of all time but I don't think that is a far comparison.

Perhaps but while Harris wasn't Richard Sherman was Woodson better than say Byron Maxwell? My point is that Man cover corners tend to be less effective when they're forced to play off their man. Even the great Deion Sanders was noticeably less effective when he wasn't able to make contact with his man. NO, and New England, ran offenses designed to inhibit a defense's ability to play press coverage defense while the Packers do not with the exception of Cobb lining up in the backfield and occasionally motioning Nelson to the slot.

I don't absolve Rodgers from the schematic deficiencies and I didn't absolve him from his big play or bust mentality of the recent past. But I look at the Offensive problems over the last several years as an overconfidence in Rodgers' abilities. I think with less arrogance GB might have won an extra Super Bowl or two in the last several years. I also think MM needs to Coach Aaron more, don't be afraid to humble him even if he is a future hall of famer. I have never gotten the impression that BB isn't willing serve Handsome Tom some humble pie.

 

[Un4GivN]

Perhaps but while Harris wasn't Richard Sherman was Woodson better than say Byron Maxwell? My point is that Man cover corners tend to be less effective when they're forced to play off their man. Even the great Deion Sanders was noticeably less effective when he wasn't able to make contact with his man. NO, and New England, ran offenses designed to inhibit a defense's ability to play press coverage defense while the Packers do not with the exception of Cobb lining up in the backfield and occasionally motioning Nelson to the slot.

I don't absolve Rodgers from the schematic deficiencies and I didn't absolve him from his big play or bust mentality of the recent past. But I look at the Offensive problems over the last several years as an overconfidence in Rodgers' abilities. I think with less arrogance GB might have won an extra Super Bowl or two in the last several years. I also think MM needs to Coach Aaron more, don't be afraid to humble him even if he is a future hall of famer. I have never gotten the impression that BB isn't willing serve Handsome Tom some humble pie.

This is totally off topic.... But thinking about the secondary and super bowl made me think of Nick Collins. What I wouldn't give to have that guy back there at 100%

And great point on the coaching, I completely agree he could use being knocked down a peg or two every now and again.

 

[easyk83]

This is totally off topic.... But thinking about the secondary and super bowl made me think of Nick Collins. What I wouldn't give to have that guy back there at 100%

And great point on the coaching, I completely agree he could use being knocked down a peg or two every now and again.

Well that's the thing we've seen his quick release and his freakish ability to throw off the snap, use that ability in shallow crosses and trip sets, dont just let our guys get mugged. Use that short passing game to set up the long balls when teams cheat up.

As for Nick Collins, me too. Great guy and a personal favorite. Good example for the fans here, took him until his 4th year to really emerge. It's a lot easier to play defense when one guy can play center field like that. Also I remember that game against the Vikes when Nick ran AP down twice... from behind, superman.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

They were exceptional at stopping the run. But The DPOY was certainly hurt, and Rodgers played lights out.

The Steelers were the second ranked pass defense in 2010 as well.

 

[Patriotplayer90]

Edelman 5'10
Sanders 5'11
Brown 5'10
ODB 6'

Height means nothing... Not the size of the dog in the fight. Its the size of the fight in the dog.

Granted its nice having a Nelson at 6'3" but its not needed.... Some of the best receivers in the league don't touch 6'

I agree, that's why I said size or speed. And if they don't have either of those to a great degree, figure out a way to play to their strengths. Beating C

Edelman 5'10
Sanders 5'11
Brown 5'10
ODB 6'

Height means nothing... Not the size of the dog in the fight. Its the size of the fight in the dog.

Granted its nice having a Nelson at 6'3" but its not needed.... Some of the best receivers in the league don't touch 6'

I agree. But neither Adams nor Montgomery have the speed of those guys, or the system that plays to their strengths.

 

[Un4GivN]

The Steelers were the second ranked pass defense in 2010 as well.

This is true, but if you take a close look at the numbers you will see there is more than meets the eye on their 2010 campaign. Elite quarterbacks still had their way at times with them.


They gave up 453 total yards to NE in week 10. Brady was 30-43 for 350 3TD and 0 INTs
And over 300 yards in 7 games.

The difference is they had a few weeks where they just ROFL stompt bad teams 2-14 Panthers (119 yards total, 45 passing) 4-12 (190 total yards 156 passing) 6-10 Titans (238 total 192 passing)

So while they were good. I don't think they were as good as people make them out to be. I don't want to take too much away from them. But at the same time I don't think they were a defense of the ages, I don't think they were even remotely as good as the defense Seattle put out the last couple years or that Denver is right now.

That is just eye test only... So maybe my eyes are broken.

 

[Un4GivN]

I agree, that's why I said size or speed. And if they don't have either of those to a great degree, figure out a way to play to their strengths. Beating C

I agree. But neither Adams nor Montgomery have the speed of those guys, or the system that plays to their strengths.

Brown isnt that fast. 4.47... Cobb is that fast I believe.
Edelman is 4.52
Sanders is the fastest at 4.41 and yet the less productive overall i would say.


Just to put things in perspective for you

Jerry Rice 4.71 and 6'1"
Turtle by your standards, slower than Adams and the same height. I stand by my comment. Measurables only mean so much. After that it's work ethic, and pure drive and will to be the best...

 

[Patriotplayer90]

Brown isnt that fast. 4.47... Cobb is that fast I believe.
Edelman is 4.52
Sanders is the fastest at 4.41 and yet the less productive overall i would say.


Just to put things in perspective for you

Jerry Rice 4.71 and 6'1"
Turtle by your standards, slower than Adams and the same height. I stand by my comment. Measurables only mean so much. After that it's work ethic, and pure drive and will to be the best...

We don't have a Jerry Rice on our team....If the receivers showed anything close to that ability, I wouldn't bring up their physical characteristics.

Edelman has Gronk and Sanders has Thomas on their teams, two guys who are very difficult to cover and require a lot of attention from The defense. That opens things up for everyone else. A better comparison would be DeAndre Hopkins.

 

[I asked LT to delete my acct]

Just a question here you understand but, is it THAT boring on the Patriots site that one or two have drifted over for a visit, (everybody is welcome of course ) ?

 

[Half Empty]

Well, with a fourth of the Lombardis given out this century, and two more (thankfully) left behind on stupid Giants' receptions, maybe they are getting a little bored in Boston.