the favre slant.

[GreenBaySlacker]

You all remember it. 4wr all slant and he picks the open one. Takes .2 seconds and we clear 5 yds minimum.

Why aren't we doing this?

 

[PackerFanLV]

Have to be able to get off the press coverage. if you cant get off press coverage that .2 turn into 3.0. Early in the game vs the lions i saw slants then clements went away from it. I dont know if the D start pressing taking away the inside or what.

 

[Raptorman]

Maybe because the Packers have been doing it for 25 years and defense's have learned to defend it?

 

[7thFloorRA]

probably because of the high percentage of int's from it....and Rodgers is a bit shorter than Favre. He gets balls tipped that he throws 20 yds down field. You try to throw that downward angle slant through the mush rush and you are in tipped ball heaven if you are on D.

They are listed at the same height but I swear 4 was taller.

 

[Shawnsta3]

From the thread "Dad was Right" a few weeks ago...

There has never been a play called more for by fans than the screen pass. Closely followed by "running the damn ball" and the Packer special, "that quick slant Favre used to be so good at."

I'm confident if Packer fans were play callers McCarthy & Clements playbook would be reduced to these three plays

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

Funny I don't remember a single quick slant getting picked. 4 receivers going 4 different ways one is always open. The missing link is favres quick and fast throw. Like a wrist flick and it was there...

Gb would have to use it at least once to see if it works. Excuses like rodgers isn't tall enough, and sarcastic eye rolls doesn't cut it.

 

[Patriotplayer90]

Funny I don't remember a single quick slant getting picked. 4 receivers going 4 different ways one is always open. The missing link is favres quick and fast throw. Like a wrist flick and it was there...

Gb would have to use it at least once to see if it works. Excuses like rodgers isn't tall enough, and sarcastic eye rolls doesn't cut it.

Why is everyone so anxious to revisit the "glory" days of Favre. He was fun to watch and had his moments, and also had some really bad ones. (This isn't directed towards your comment, just ones from people pining to see Favre out there)

Rodgers is having his worst stint in what could be years while it looks like he's fighting some sort of undisclosed injury, and how bad has it been? He's turned it over twice over the span over those 3 while getting hit 10-15 times each outing.. I'm sorry, but I've seen much worse from Favre. And Favre has choked or given plenty of games away at the end, while I don't see Rodgers doing the same.

I'm sorry, I love the guy, but Rodgers is a clear step above Favre and has given us a consistent top performer for years. When you compare Favre's shining moments to Rodgers poor ones, you aren't really evaluating the situation as you are ignoring Favre's many, many awful ones.

 

[Half Empty]

Don't need to say much about this softball served up to us "Super Bowl or Bust" fans.

 

[Crockett&Tubbs]

There's now a safety usually in these passing windows, as well as more ILBs in there... without Jordy, EVERYTHING is more clogged up, congested in the areas of these short passes in the middle of the field.
You wonder why we keep throwing these short out passes that gain 1 or 2 yards with no YAC? The middle is not open.

We don't have a seambusting TE like Jermichael Finley.

Thompson/MM like their TEs to be almost-interchangable as FBs.
Richard Rodgers is not fast. We have no speed as pointed out by ESPN the week before last week's loss.

We do actually, of course, of a speed guy in Janis, but Rodgers doesn't like him.

 

[Patriotplayer90]

There's now a safety usually in these passing windows, as well as more ILBs in there... without Jordy, EVERYTHING is more clogged up, congested in the areas of these short passes in the middle of the field.
You wonder why we keep throwing these short out passes that gain 1 or 2 yards with no YAC? The middle is not open.

We don't have a seambusting TE like Jermichael Finley.

Thompson/MM like their TEs to be almost-interchangable as FBs.
Richard Rodgers is not fast. We have no speed as pointed out by ESPN the week before last week's loss.

We do actually, of course, of a speed guy in Janis, but Rodgers doesn't like him.

I believe he wants Janis to succeed- you could see him give Janis a "helmet pat" after giving them a much-needed spark with a 20+ yard catch and run. They obviously don't feel like He's a guy capable of mastering the route tree, and that's the type of player they want out there, even if they are slow and ineffective.

The good thing about his situation is that we do occasionally see him out there, and all he has to do break loose and score a long TD just once, which we all know he is capable of. It's not like they would decrease his playing time to nothing if something like that were to happen, and the coaching staff would receive a lot of questions if they were.

 

[Ogsponge]

I believe he wants Janis to succeed- you could see him give Janis a "helmet pat" after giving them a much-needed spark with a 20+ yard catch and run. They obviously don't feel like He's a guy capable of mastering the route tree, and that's the type of player they want out there, even if they are slow and ineffective.

The good thing about his situation is that we do occasionally see him out there, and all he has to do break loose and score a long TD just once, which we all know he is capable of. It's not like they would decrease his playing time to nothing if something like that were to happen, and the coaching staff would receive a lot of questions if they were.

They should already be getting lots of questions. This whole mythical Rodgers trust in his receivers **** is getting really old really fast. If that is what it takes for Rodgers to be a successful QB than he is no where near as good of a QB as people seem to think he is. Because he is saying all of my receivers need to be better in order for me to be better...

 

[Patriotplayer90]

They should already be getting lots of questions. This whole mythical Rodgers trust in his receivers **** is getting really old really fast. If that is what it takes for Rodgers to be a successful QB than he is no where near as good of a QB as people seem to think he is. Because he is saying all of my receivers need to be better in order for me to be better...

Rodgers doesn't decide who goes onto the field. I have seen no hesitation for him to go to Janis or anyone else when they are open. They apparently think very few receivers are capable of picking up this ineffective scheme, as no other team in the league would have considered picking up Jeremy Ross in the wake of a loss to their #1 receiver. IMO, nature wins over nurture, so I'd rather see the biggest, fastest guy out there more instead of a good route runner like Adams who is slow and can't catch.

 

[Croak]

I believe I also read that it was getting receivers drilled by the defense a lot. It's probably still in the playbook, but I'm not sure they want to take any more injuries to the receiving corps at this point.

 

[OldSchool101]

I agree the slant is still useful and we haven't seen enough of it to determine if it's working or not IMO

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Rodgers doesn't decide who goes onto the field.

Rodgers has said repeatedly that a receiver making too many mental mistakes won't see the field with him playing QB.

 

[Ogsponge]

Care to explain why you disagree TJV? You don't think that bs is getting old? You don't see that Rodgers is not as good without his security blanket in Jordy? You're fine with the Packers offense continuing to be anemic while Rodgers and the staff won't trying anything different because of this mythical "trust"? You don't think a great QB makes the players around him better? You are okay with watching the team look like this because Rodgers doesn't throw interceptions? I remember when Jordy went down everyone thought that there was nothing to worry about because Rodgers is so great (and he is) but we are all starting to see that he is no where near the best. The best makes plays happen, the best gets his receivers the ball, the best wins games with the personnel he has, the best does not refer to unicorns when explaining his receivers.

Rodgers is great, but it is becoming obvious he is only as good as his supporting cast as much as it pains me to say. And if it is not his supporting cast that is the problem (which I am completely willing to debate) Then the coaches are horrible and it is time for a change because they are so arrogant and stuck in their ways that in 3 straight games we have not see one thing different from this offense in an attempt to win a game.

Something is completely broken with this offense right now and it is either Rodgers himself or the coaches. It is time for the leaders of this team to stop talking about fairy tales and start utilizing the players they have and create plays with which then can succeed.

By the way I am not attacking you here just trying to figure out what it is you disagree with?

 

[Shawnsta3]

Not sure this applies here, and while I wholeheartedly feel Rodgers is the more efficient and better quarterback; there was just nothing like the joy of watching Brett Favre play football. The childish enthusiasm, the back foot throws, the underhand tosses while he was getting tackled. None of this is overstated in how fun it was to watch.

Rodgers is "too smart" for all that but I definitely think there are times; especially late in games when a comeback is needed (looking at you GB vs. SF 2014 Divisional Round) where I think he could loosen up. You've got nothing to lose, go for it man. But this is nit-picking an overall good trait to have, so I digress.

 

[Patriotplayer90]

Care to explain why you disagree TJV? You don't think that bs is getting old? You don't see that Rodgers as good without his security blanket in Jordy? You're fine with the Packers offense continuing to be anemic while Rodgers and the staff won't trying anything different because of this mythical "trust"? You don't think a great QB makes the players around him better? You are okay with watching the team look like because Rodgers doesn;t throw interceptions? I remember when Jordy went down everyone that there was nothing to worry about because Rodgers is so great (and he is) but we are all starting to see that he is no where near the best. The best makes plays happen, the best gets his receivers the ball, the best wins games with the personal he has, the best does not refer to unicorns when explaining his receivers.

Rodgers is great, but it is becoming obvious he is only as good as his supporting cast as much as it pains me to say. And if it is not his supporting cast that is the problem (which I am completely willing to debate) Then the coaches are horrible and it is time for a change because they are so arrogant and stuck in their ways that in 3 straight games we have not see one thing different from this offense in an attempt to win a game.

Something is completely broken with this offense right now and it is either Rodgers himself or the coaches. It is time for the leaders of this team to stop talking about fairy tales and start utilizing the players they have and create plays with which then can succeed.

By the way I am not attacking you here just trying to figure out what it is you disagree with?

Every QB is limited by their supporting cast. Look at Brady's seasons without a Moss or Gronk to throw the ball to. He had completely human stats much closer to Tannehill than the ones we've seen from him lately. The difference is that the defense and special teams played well and kept them in games, and he just had to make it happen at the end of the game.

 

[Sky King]

Teams have identities. Players on the team have identities. Rodgers is not the carefree gunslinger that Favre was. Rodgers seems to be more the conservative CPA. He definitely plays his best when he plays with the lead. It's not part of his identity to carelessly take chances and his so-so record of late comebacks accurately reflects that phenomena.

Personally, I have no problem accepting his well-above average cautious approach to (not) throwing INTs. But that comes with a flip-side. He's not going to suddenly throw caution to the wind when he's playing from behind. Fast starts in games must be especially important to Rodgers. Doing so plays to the strength of Rodgers, and his game face and body language in such situations is quite revealing.

Getting him to play from behind early is exactly what the opposition is striving for because that seems to be more daunting for Rodgers to overcome than it is for some other elite QBs, especially late in the game. Late comebacks are not his forte. Again, his game face and body language is a terrific barometer of his disappointment and frustration. When he gets "that look" he projects the aura of an already beaten man. He wears his attitude on his sleeve -- maybe a little too much -- and lately, a little too often and a lot too early.

 

[PackerDNA]

Teams have identities. Players on the team have identities. Rodgers is not the carefree gunslinger that Favre was. Rodgers seems to be more the conservative CPA. He definitely plays his best when he plays with the lead. It's not part of his identity to carelessly take chances and his so-so record of late comebacks accurately reflects that phenomena.

Personally, I have no problem accepting his well-above average cautious approach to (not) throwing INTs. But that comes with a flip-side. He's not going to suddenly throw caution to the wind when he's playing from behind. Fast starts in games must be especially important to Rodgers. Doing so plays to the strength of Rodgers, and his game face and body language in such situations is quite revealing.

Getting him to play from behind early is exactly what the opposition is striving for because that seems to be more daunting for Rodgers to overcome than it is for some other elite QBs, especially late in the game. Late comebacks are not his forte. Again, his game face and body language is a terrific barometer of his disappointment and frustration. When he gets "that look" he projects the aura of an already beaten man. He wears his attitude on his sleeve -- maybe a little too much -- and lately, a little too often and a lot too early.

Had a discussion at the bar last week after the game, and one of my buddies said a lot of the same things about Rodgers, Sky King. Said he's missing that inner something that the truly great ones have when the chips are down.
He then used a term I've used for other Qb's- stat king. As long as things are going good and according to plan, he's something to behold. But when things start to break down, so does he. He also called him machine like.
Gave me some pause and food for thought.

 

[Croak]

It seems to me as I watch Rodgers lately that he has a bad case of "happy feet" in the pocket. I don't think he trusts his o line to protect him.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

Along with the slant. I want to see da bomb!!! Give Janis and rr a chance to go up and get the ball. I have seen them both do it. Adams apparently can leap like a kangaroo. Suposed to be the new deep threat. I'm not seeing it yet. Catch Adams( Cobb and da Mon tster too) catch em in stride with the long slant I call it. Basicly a favre slant (all 4 wrs slant) but they do it at top speed 10 yds down field. Between the 4 ONE WILL BE OPEN!!! Guaranteed. Just up to rodgers to dart the ball into the, sometimes small, opening. Point is, our yds after the catch aren't there because we aren't using the wrs strengths. Getting the quick guys the ball in stride on these high percentage plays. Not the bomb obviously, as far as high percentage goes... But Janis against a safety I like a few times a game to keep them honest. Also rr up the seam sounds very good as well. Zing that sucker right over his shoulder and good things will happen...

 

[TJV]

Some of us have been saying Rodgers has had "happy feet" for a few games now. We'd all like to see some deep balls completed but if the OL remains inconsistent and lack of a running game continues, that's just not realistic. What I'd rather see is more of an emphasis on moving the chains. For example on the first series against the Lions they had a 3rd and 3 at the Lions' 26 and Rodgers threw the ball to Adams near the EZ. I'd have rather seen a 4 or 5-yard completion instead of settling for a FG.

And anyone advocating R Rodgers up the seam hasn't been paying attention or has unrealistic expectations.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

So you are saying you have to be super fast to go up the seam? Rr is a big body who imo, can go up and get it. A physical receiver with good hands. Throw him the dang ball deep and ilbs will fail.

For you to simply say. O it won't work. No need to try... Well that's just goofy.

 

[TJV]

For you to simply say. O it won't work. No need to try... Well that's just goofy.

What's goofy is your posting as if every Packers player is a pro bowler.