You are too bright for this post, Barfarn and I mean that completely respectfully. You, yourself, would first say if you were trying to debunk it that 5 routes vs. Detroit over a 2 year career is a ridiculously miniscule sample size and in no way should be extrapolated to the lengths you have.
Another counter point...you consistently call Mike McCarthy a brilliant head coach. One of the best...right up there with Bill Belichick who praises Mike McCarthy for his prowess. Now, in this post you all but imply this is the fault of Mike McCarthy for not allowing him to do this and when he actually did it was successful. So, by making this point you are undoing a previous point made about the brilliance of MM. It can't be both.
We all watch these games. We all see Richard Rodgers fall down, immediately, upon contact...run like a DE not a DEER, yet, you spin him into something he isn't based on FIVE PLAYS AT DETROIT when we were woefully behind and Detroit had it dialed down? That's foolhardy. We have seen our Packers go into that very shell Detroit did that night way too many times. Have any of us drawn any ill conclusions about our team when the other team amasses tons of yard against us once we stopped trying? I don't think the Chiefs drew anything from what they did to us after we had them buried at Lambeau but you're making a giant big picture point on an underperforming player in just such a circumstance. I think that is beneath you.
He fails the eyeball test game after game after game. If it walks like a duck talks like a duck it's a duck not some pretty peacock like you're selling here. You're asking people to betray themselves and what they've seen implying that you have some secret knowledge because you study the tape. I will give you all the credit in the world for putting together cogent high brow postings but in the end it's about the heart of the real matter and that matter is RR isn't very good and isn't athletic. If he played for ANYONE else you would see him differently as would those here who want to latch to what you're telling them is true against everything they believe.
RR seems to be a fine young man but he's a moderate talent at very best. RR will be fine is right if we're going for a mediocre option that has no speed or athleticism and can't break a tackle. I think we should be shooting just a wee bit higher instead of rationalizing and justifying very very middling results. Stats be darned. He's just not a difference maker and NEVER will be. NEVER and I think that is anything but "fine" and NO WAY...MORE THAN FINE.
EDIT: Barfarn would be the first to say not to use stats, Nerd. EVERYONE who watches football knew that Finley commanded special attention. Richard Rodgers never has...never will. Finley had athleticism...could break tackles. RR has far better hands. If Finley had his hands...wow. RR is a nice safe middling unspectacular TE and fits perfectly with our GM. The same GM that is praised and made into better than he is just like, ironically, now one of his draft picks is. TE is a HUGE need on this team. I truly hope we do something there this offseason.
He was instructed to line up at the 10, iirc in case the ball was batted down out of the end zone into the field of play. However he caught the ball high and followed it down, used his height to reach the ball at the high point, made the play.
Compare his stats to Finley's second year.
Originally Posted by: nerdmann
My apologies for responding too much in this thread but this was a must. It is really maddening when this repeatedly happens here. It is always misinformation twisting the truth to fit an agenda. Richard Rodgers was not supposed to do that at all. Watch the clip of the play...he was WAY behind everyone else due to his lumbering long speed. Here is RR in his own words not the non reality presented above to fit an agenda:
from CBSSports.com:
When Aaron Rodgers launched his Hail Mary pass into the air on the final play of the game against the Lions on Thursday, Richard Rodgers had one job, and that job wasn't to catch the ball.
The Packers tight was actually supposed to box out as many defenders as he could so that wide receiver Davante Adams could make the catch.
"I'm supposed to be boxing out and Davante is supposed to be the jumper," Richard Rodgers said after the game, via NFL.com. "But once I saw it in the air I realized I could get it. So I just went for it."
Compare the highlighted portions the one above to the one below. They are vastly different. It's hard to box people out in the endzone when you're standing at the 10 waiting for a deflection.
Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."