1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!

    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers. You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
    Dismiss Notice

Why does Rodgers only want to throw to Adams?

Discussion in 'Green Bay Packers Fan Forum' started by Wildcatk23, Oct 18, 2020.

  1. Wildcatk23

    Wildcatk23 Repeat?

    Messages:
    141
    Likes Received:
    29
    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2011
    Location:
    Kentucky
    Packer Fan Since:
    1996
    If Adams is on the field he don’t even go through his progression? He plays so much better without him on the field it’s astounding ? What does one do about this....
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. scotscheese

    scotscheese Cheesehead

    Messages:
    933
    Likes Received:
    166
    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2013
    Location:
    Aberdeen, Scotland
    Packer Fan Since:
    1997
    make him listen to those that come out of hiding after a bad performance
     
    • Funny Funny x 3
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  3. El Guapo

    El Guapo Cheesehead

    Messages:
    4,582
    Likes Received:
    524
    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Location:
    Land 'O Lakes
    Packer Fan Since:
    1976
    There is truth to this. It happened last year too but I'm not sure if anything can be "done" except for LaFluer pointing it out during film review.

    Adams is the best receiver on the team. It's natural for Rodgers to go his way. To be fair though, MVS and ESB couldn't haul in passes tonight. He missed connections with just about everyone else. Whom else could Rodgers throw to?
     
  4. lambeaulambo

    lambeaulambo Cheesehead

    Messages:
    1,218
    Likes Received:
    113
    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2010
    Location:
    Hell
    Packer Fan Since:
    1974
    first of all, get ESB out of your heads, he is going to be relegated to special teams if he cannot produce, and he has shown nothing so far. Adams is not a detriment to this offense, but MLF has got to tell AR directly to look for the open man every single play, and at least 67 pct of the time there are other options. Adams is a weapon but teams know it and will double him up, leaving a mismatch somewhere. Adams cannot be the focus and the game plan every week, he just cant.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. Pokerbrat2000

    Pokerbrat2000 Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.

    Messages:
    20,674
    Likes Received:
    2,357
    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2012
    Location:
    Madison, WI
    Packer Fan Since:
    1973
    That is the problem, against a good defense, his main weapons can become very limited/shut down by the defense and he knows it. The Bucs were pretty effective today at shutting down both Jones and Adams. There was a pass play very early on to EQ, I believe it was an audible on a hot read and EQ clearly missed it and wasn't anywhere near where Rodgers threw the ball. That play might have seemed insignificant, but Rodgers was clearly upset and I am sure in his mind he is thinking "****, Adams is the only guy out here knowing what he is doing". Maybe there is some truth to the fact that when Adams isn't out there, Rodgers has no other choice but to trust whoever is, but there also is the theory that he really just doesn't have a lot of talent in his WR's and TE's besides Adams.

    I think the only people that can clearly answer the questions posed here are the Packer coaches and possibly the players.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  6. thequick12

    thequick12 Cheesehead

    Messages:
    1,507
    Likes Received:
    89
    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2014
    Packer Fan Since:
    1992
    Did eqsb drop some balls ? I didn't watch game that closely but I didn't see him targeted...behind adams and Lazard. Eq is best wr they have. Mvs is more of a one trick pony than a wr at this point although I was encouraged by some of the nice short route plays he made in this game
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  7. Mondio

    Mondio Cheesehead

    Messages:
    11,725
    Likes Received:
    1,049
    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2014
    Packer Fan Since:
    1980
    One short one he did and another quick one I think was a change at the line and he wasn’t looking when Rodgers there it.
     
  8. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Messages:
    24,749
    Likes Received:
    1,226
    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Packer Fan Since:
    1995
    Rodgers targeted Adams on 10 of 35 passes (28.6%). With a lack of talent aside of him at the position that number doesn't seem to be outrageous by any means.
     
    • Agree Agree x 6
  9. tynimiller

    tynimiller Cheesehead

    Messages:
    3,402
    Likes Received:
    255
    Joined:
    May 2, 2012
    Packer Fan Since:
    1986
    Personally I had no issue with the number of targets Adams way, the only issue I had is Rodgers unlike him was ONLY looking to Adams on the majority of them.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  10. PackerDNA

    PackerDNA Cheesehead

    Messages:
    4,292
    Likes Received:
    307
    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2014
    Packer Fan Since:
    1959
    Adams is the only elite receiver he has.A good defense can shut down everyone else. Not that it matters since a good pass rush takes Roger's out.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  11. Pintsizedbox9

    Pintsizedbox9 Cheesehead

    Messages:
    380
    Likes Received:
    14
    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2016
    One poor game and you'd think Rodgers targeted Adams 17 times yesterday by some of these comments.

    Give some credit to the Bucs. They owned
    the LOS and blanketed the short routes all day.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  12. tynimiller

    tynimiller Cheesehead

    Messages:
    3,402
    Likes Received:
    255
    Joined:
    May 2, 2012
    Packer Fan Since:
    1986
    Let us not forget...we are 6-0 in games without Adams.
     
  13. Pokerbrat2000

    Pokerbrat2000 Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.

    Messages:
    20,674
    Likes Received:
    2,357
    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2012
    Location:
    Madison, WI
    Packer Fan Since:
    1973

    That is a very scary statement if true, but also very telling and possibly correct. Generally speaking, that is the problem for MLF, Rodgers and the Packer offense, besides Adams, they have yet to find someone that they can consistently rely on to run the right routes, get open and catch the ball. Yes, Lazard was showing that potential, but he is injured so next man up, who is it going to be? While they can get by with this against the weaker defenses, the better ones seem to be able to shut our offense right down.
     
  14. Pokerbrat2000

    Pokerbrat2000 Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.

    Messages:
    20,674
    Likes Received:
    2,357
    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2012
    Location:
    Madison, WI
    Packer Fan Since:
    1973
    Can I ask you for an honest answer? Would the Packers have won that game yesterday had Adams not played?

    Who were we 6-0 against? I know who it was this year, but that stat is somewhat meaningless if it was against weak defenses, like the games this season. Also, would we be 0-6 in those games had Adams played? I doubt it.

    I understand why people want to point that stat out, but as Captain's numbers showed, Rodgers spread the ball around yesterday and we still lost with Adams on the field. To me its more of talent issue, our talent being less than some of the defenses we have gotten completely shut down by.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  15. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator Moderator

    Messages:
    20,967
    Likes Received:
    1,948
    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Location:
    Milwaukee
    Packer Fan Since:
    1975
    it is interesting that wo Adams the Pack seem to be able to win? I cant recall last year but this year they were moving and scoring at ease.

    I think there is something to it because it is a pattern and not a radom event
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. tynimiller

    tynimiller Cheesehead

    Messages:
    3,402
    Likes Received:
    255
    Joined:
    May 2, 2012
    Packer Fan Since:
    1986
    While hypotheticals are impossible to say, I'd place a fairly confident bet no.
     
  17. tynimiller

    tynimiller Cheesehead

    Messages:
    3,402
    Likes Received:
    255
    Joined:
    May 2, 2012
    Packer Fan Since:
    1986
    I place a lot of the loss yesterday at the feet of MLF and Rodgers. The unraveling after the first interception was apparent heavy in both their jobs after it. Failing grades each.

    That said, this team IMO is still better than last year's 13-3 team, even if the record ends up not showing it (I predicted 12-4). Autrocious games deserve scrutiny for a time and then moving on.
     
  18. Pintsizedbox9

    Pintsizedbox9 Cheesehead

    Messages:
    380
    Likes Received:
    14
    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2016
    I'd agree. I dont think the receivers were an issue at all yesterday. Tampa's defense was well prepared and played great.

    Most offenses find it difficult when facing a really good front. The Packers, however, seem to struggle mightily in these cases.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  19. Pokerbrat2000

    Pokerbrat2000 Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.

    Messages:
    20,674
    Likes Received:
    2,357
    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2012
    Location:
    Madison, WI
    Packer Fan Since:
    1973
    Last year Adams missed the following games and the Packers won:

    @Cowboys (34-24)
    Lions (23-22)
    Raiders (42-24)
    @Chiefs (31-24)

    This year:

    @Saints (37-30
    Falcons (30-16)


    I guess its time to trade Adams? :coffee: :eek:
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  20. KyraReppe5

    KyraReppe5 "We're going to relentlessly chase perfection."

    Messages:
    1,177
    Likes Received:
    155
    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2015
    Location:
    Cranston, RI
    Packer Fan Since:
    1996
    Hopefully MLF recognizes this now. Not in the sense that "the Packers do not need Adams" but in the sense that you can game plan to "make someone else 'the guy' while Adams is in the game." Once Adams went down, Lazard had a game, then Big Bob had a game. If they would have gone into that game saying IDK Jamal Williams or Jace Sternberger was going to be "the guy" it does not force Rodgers to choose between throwing to EQ and Adams. Let a new guy have their day each week and don't force balls to Adams because EQ cannot catch and MVS is one dimensional.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  21. Pokerbrat2000

    Pokerbrat2000 Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.

    Messages:
    20,674
    Likes Received:
    2,357
    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2012
    Location:
    Madison, WI
    Packer Fan Since:
    1973
    I am all for praising Tampa Bay and their defense, they played well and overwhelmed our OL, got into Rodgers head and gave up very little after the 1st Q. However, if you look at their previous games, against some really not all that good of offenses or QB's, people need to be honest with themselves and realize that the Packer offense had just as much to do with that loss as the Bucs defense. While the final score was 38-10, our offense basically scored 10 points and gave up 14.
     
    Last edited: Oct 19, 2020
    • Agree Agree x 1
  22. Mondio

    Mondio Cheesehead

    Messages:
    11,725
    Likes Received:
    1,049
    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2014
    Packer Fan Since:
    1980
    We got our asses handed to us, no prettying this one up. The bucs are good up front with great Lb'ers,, but our effort was poor, very poor across the board. especially across the offensive line
     
  23. tynimiller

    tynimiller Cheesehead

    Messages:
    3,402
    Likes Received:
    255
    Joined:
    May 2, 2012
    Packer Fan Since:
    1986
    Honestly, the way we looked I firmly believe you could have given us OBJ and Julio Jones out there with Adams and we still lose. Yes, we looked that rough on Offense after the first two drives.
     
  24. PackerDNA

    PackerDNA Cheesehead

    Messages:
    4,292
    Likes Received:
    307
    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2014
    Packer Fan Since:
    1959
    I think too much stock is put into that the Packers are 6-0 without Adams. To me, it's kind of like saying the Packers have a good defense because they lead the league in three and outs.
     
  25. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator Moderator

    Messages:
    20,967
    Likes Received:
    1,948
    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Location:
    Milwaukee
    Packer Fan Since:
    1975
    Show.me where I said that

    I said its a pattern..they need to figure out why it is.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1

Share This Page

-->