Zero2Cool
15 years ago
Source Link 

The following is the analysis of the Packers' 38-26 loss to the Minnesota Vikings in Brett Favre's return to Lambeau Field.

Q. In considering the differences between the Packers and Vikings, I'm sure there were a number of things that stood out to you, but was there one thing in particular that came through loud and clear from the game Sunday?


A. I think that one team is undisciplined and maybe not as prepared and the other team has a team full of veterans, they're smart, they're well-coached, they understand the magnitude of the game. The game is not too big for them. It just seems like they've been preparing for this for a long time. I don't see them making critical errors. If they do, they can overcome it. I see an offensive line that is a fortress. They have a couple of good players on that line, but they're not all Pro Bowlers. The right tackle is a rookie. So, it just seems like they were prepared to do battle in a hostile environment, but I don't know if it's so hostile anymore. I think the veteran factor separates these two teams, one being an elite team and the other a team trying to find out how good they really are. It shows up in penalties, it shows up in explosive plays, in decision-making. Probably No. 1 in decision-making. The Packers, being one of the youngest teams in the league, I think it's accepted, we're not going to make these great plays as some of these veteran teams. To me, they didn't spend a lot of money on that offensive line. The Vikings did to get Adrian Peterson into the secondary and to protect their quarterback. It seems to me if you had spent that kind of money on Aaron Rodgers, that you do everything you can to protect him. Why even have money under the cap if you're not going to get talent in front of him to block for him? The Packers are playing a future game, a game for the future, but it's right now. Right now, you have to have some veterans with your younger guys. Four or five years from now, the Packers will probably be pretty good. But you're playing teams that are winning right now, like Minnesota, like Philadelphia, like Atlanta, like the Giants. The Packers are playing with future talent and that's why they can't win big games right now.

Q. It's probably unfair to expect Aaron Rodgers to be as good as a future Hall of Famer like Brett Favre, but what is the difference right now in their games? Where are the Vikings benefiting from Favre that the Packers are lacking with Rodgers?

A. Game management. There's a huge difference. Favre can manage a game. I mean look at it, no sacks in two games and seven touchdowns. He can manage the game better than Rodgers right now. Rodgers held the ball a couple of times instead of running for first downs. Brett gets rid of the ball. If he has to run, he will. Just good decisions. And that normally doesn't go with Brett, good decisions, because of all the interceptions. He's thrown the most interceptions in history. But these two games against the Packers he's made great decisions and he manages the game a lot better. I think that's one or two areas. I just don't want Aaron to become a stat guy, leading in all these areas but not having won anything. We have too many of those quarterbacks. You have to win the big game.

Q. After the game, defensive end Cullen Jenkins became the second player on defense to express real frustration with the 3-4 system. He said he felt that players were handcuffed and weren't put in position to do what they're good at. Do you agree with that or was he just frustrated?

A. I agree because you have to find out what your players are good at and let them do that. Otherwise, you're going to have a bunch of robots or system guys. Both corners are bump-and-run guys, they're not used to playing off. It just kind of hinders you when you're playing within the system and the system doesn't fit. I made all-pro with three or different coordinators. It didn't matter what system it was, I made it work. So, on the one hand, you have that, too. As players you have to win the one-on-one matchups. You have to win. It's a team sport, but it's one person in that helmet. Go make a play. As players, I know it's easy for us to blame the system and for coaches it's easy to blame the players. But ultimately it's up to the players. Coaches don't make players, players make coaches, so you have to go out there and make plays. The only reason I agree with him is that he's not the only one saying this, that the system may not fit them.

Q. Do you think it would have sent a message if Mike McCarthy had benched defensive end Johnny Jolly for his head-butting penalty that gave the Vikings a first down after they had been stopped on third down? Or do you think that was just part of the game?


A. No. He has to go after him. He should have got right in his face and let him know the magnitude of it. But I think it's accepted. I think those plays are accepted. Jolly said, hey, that's how he plays. So the coaches know how he plays. They're not surprised that happened. The only one who was surprised is everyone in that stadium. But the coaches weren't surprised. You didn't see any coaches get all bent out of shape. They think it's part of football, just like they think the penalties are part of football. That's the system they play under, that they're going to make mistakes like that and they're OK with that. I don't know why you would be. To me, that's just accepting something that won't work. So you're basically telling me he can do it again and it's OK? I just know if that would have happened with coach Holmgren, he would have been all over you, he would have gotten in your face on national TV. He'd let you know, you can't do that. Just walk off the field. You hold them to a field goal if you walk off the field. You know if it's close you're going to get the flag because all the referees know you're one of the most penalized teams. A guy hit Rodgers right in the back with his helmet when he was scrambling and he didn't get called for spearing. If that was another quarterback, a more elite quarterback, he would have gotten that call. So the Packers have to be smart. Stay away from that stuff. If you want to play with emotion, you have to know when to turn it on and when to turn it off.

Q. Where do you think the Packers go from here?

A. Well, they have to get to 5-3. They have to beat Tampa Bay to start out with. Really, they need to win three straight. If they win three straight, now you're back in the playoff hunt. If you go 2-1, it's tough. If you go 0-3, forget about it. The next goal for the Packers is to win the next three games. Once you win the next three games, now Minnesota can't slip at all. You have to pick up the pieces and get back to what you've done and try to figure out what your players are good at and let them play. Just let them play. Give them the information, the players take the information and you execute it. Too many excuses. I didn't care who my coordinator was, I tried to work his system. But he also has to let me play. It's a team game, but again there's only one person in a helmet.


UserPostedImage
PackFanWithTwins
15 years ago
I disagree with any attempt to compare Brett's performance to Aaron's unless they are in the same situation. Brett can manage the game, yes he can when not getting pressure and the coach is calling slants for him to throw quick on.

Aaron can manage a game, when we are giving him protection, and short patterns. One thing that was notideable was Chilly always had a slant dialed up somewhere for Brett. We didn't. We had players running 5 yards before anyone made any cut for the route. Most were 10-15 or more. We should have 1 if not 2 players running slants, or curls. We need to have that WR short as an option.

Put both QBs in the same scenerio and they both will have the same about of success.
The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
RedSoxExcel
15 years ago

I disagree with any attempt to compare Brett's performance to Aaron's unless they are in the same situation. Brett can manage the game, yes he can when not getting pressure and the coach is calling slants for him to throw quick on.

Aaron can manage a game, when we are giving him protection, and short patterns. One thing that was notideable was Chilly always had a slant dialed up somewhere for Brett. We didn't. We had players running 5 yards before anyone made any cut for the route. Most were 10-15 or more. We should have 1 if not 2 players running slants, or curls. We need to have that WR short as an option.

Put both QBs in the same scenerio and they both will have the same about of success.

"PackFanWithTwins" wrote:



Why do you disagree? I think what Butler is trying to say is that he takes sacks that he shouldn't and holds on to the ball too long (which he does, i.e. that 2nd sack in the 1st half). Why not just throw it away when you outside of the box instead of losing 8 yards. Plus Favre can pick up blitzs a lot better. Woodson said after they game, they threw everything at Favre and he knew it was coming almost every time and got rid of the ball or changed the play. Rodgers is young, he will read defenses better with time. But right now, its not even close in that regard.

Also, if you look at 31-26, late in the 4th, we had the ball and we didn't score. They got the ball and they scored 38-26. You can't really compare two players that play on the same side of the ball but its obviously human nature to do so and we do all the time. But Favre outplayed Rodgers in that game.

Rodgers is young, he will grow as a player but right now Favre is a better game manager. If you had one game right now, one drive, would you honestly choose Rodgers over Favre given all of Favre's experience and ability to run the two minute drill with the pressure on him?

This is not a slight against Rodgers, he's young and we're comparing him to one of the top 10 Qbs of ALL TIME.
blank
PackFanWithTwins
15 years ago
That is like 3 or 4 sacks our of 14. Rodgers should have run or thrown the ball away. I agree.

What I am saying is that you cannot compare Brett having 0 sacks with no pressure and Rodgers getting sacked 14 times under extreme pressure and talk about it being because Brett manages the game.

The reason Brett is able to manage the game is because he isn't under that pressure. When Brett has been pressured, I have seen him multiple times this year, take the Strahan pose, and just fall on the ground.
The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
RedSoxExcel
15 years ago
Yeah but I don't think its just the whole OL thing. I also think there is a difference in the ability to read blitzs, change plays, etc.

I would assume that Rodgers has less flexibility than Favre to change plays as he is younger and the coach does not trust him as much, which makes sense. But sometimes, its not about how the OL does, its about how you read the defense. I bet if you watch the game again, you will see Favre running around talking to the players before the snap just before the blitz happened. Woodson said everytime, his pointed it out, got rid of the ball or changed plays. Favre isn't perfect because I'm pretty sure he has taken a lot of sacks too (though a lot of them were early when he was still getting used to the team).

Perfect example though is before this week, Manning, I think had ZERO sacks (not sure though). And he is a guy that always changes the play at the line. Maybe he just has the best OL in the world (they're good) but I would guess part of it is his ability to read the defense's set.

We can start handicapping Rodgers because of OL, but then you would have to handicap Favre for being FORTY and having all the pressure in the world on him that game. Would you say Cutler is one of the best QBs in the league because his Forte has played GARBAGE this season and does anyone even know who his WRs are?

What cost us the game was the first half. Our offense was useless (defense was decent but not great). We were down 24-3 with 3 minutes into the 2nd half, its hard to win games like that.
blank
PackFanWithTwins
15 years ago
Favre doesn't, and never has changed plays. The WCO is built so QBs don't need to call audibles. Almost every play has options, so they just check to different options.

Checking to runs, and calling hot routes is the WCO. Rodgers is close to 75% against the Biltz, so that isn't the problem. The problem is you don't call hot routes when the defense is rushing base.
The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
longtimefan
15 years ago

(defense was decent but not great). We were down 24-3 with 3 minutes into the 2nd half, its hard to win games like that.

"RedSoxExcel" wrote:



Defense was HORRIBLE

stop them for a Fg att but a dumb ass head butt and thats a 4 point swing..

Then s/t can't tackle at all and then on top of that, the defense is allowing 3rd and long completions..You saw what happened when they get to the q/b but they failed on so many crucial times in the 1st half its just annoying..
zombieslayer
15 years ago

I disagree with any attempt to compare Brett's performance to Aaron's unless they are in the same situation. Brett can manage the game, yes he can when not getting pressure and the coach is calling slants for him to throw quick on.

Aaron can manage a game, when we are giving him protection, and short patterns. One thing that was notideable was Chilly always had a slant dialed up somewhere for Brett. We didn't. We had players running 5 yards before anyone made any cut for the route. Most were 10-15 or more. We should have 1 if not 2 players running slants, or curls. We need to have that WR short as an option.

Put both QBs in the same scenerio and they both will have the same about of success.

"PackFanWithTwins" wrote:



+1.

I really hate saying this. Seriously. This makes me sick to the stomach saying this. But I have to say it.

Childress' playcalling was better than MM's.

Yikes. The whole thought makes me sick.

How come Mike McCarthy didn't look across the field and do the same thing Childress was doing? Send either Driver or Jennings on short slants or set up some WR and RB screens. Heck, have either Driver or Jennings simply turn around and the ball will be there. Allow them to juke the CB and gain a quick 5-6 yards.

Favre was doing that all night, and that opened up the deeper routes which Favre was completing. Aaron could have been doing the same thing, and instead of 6 sacks, there probably would have been 3.

EDIT: Forgot to add. Back to Butler. Note what he says about Holmgren and penalties and the crap Jolly did.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
ILikeThePackers39
15 years ago
So I'm an ex-RB and will admit right off that I'm not a passing game guru.

But I keep hearing "run the short slants" as if they're a given, and I;m wondering if it's that simple. When they're (the Vikes) getting strong pressure with a 4-man rush, the aren't there 7 guys out in coverage - and might several of them be hanging around where you'd want to hit those quick slants? As in they're not a given and they've not been there for Rodgers when he hits that 3rd step? I'm asking, so let's not get snippy.

What I seem to see a number of times: Rodgers gets to his quick drop, looks and something doesn't seem to be there, tries to go to his next reads and then is caught up in the rush - we all know how the rest of the story goes.

So what I'm asking is: If you've got a situation where the opposing D is able to rush 4 guys and keep everyone else out in coverage, could those defenses not be taking those quick slants away?

I've decided to hold my tongue on the whole "Rodgers holds the ball too long!" deal - put simply, I don't agree, and moreover that's a critique that depends on whether it works or not. Roethlesberger gets praised all the time for the same thing, but the words change to something like "keeps working to extend the play". I'd rather my QB keep giving that effort, even if it leads to a couple more sacks per year.
blank
Stevetarded
15 years ago
Right now what we have is a line that gives our QB as much time vs a 4 man rush as other teams get against a blitz. On top of that an ineffective running game. It looks like Rodgers is holding the ball too long but he needs more time because the receivers are outnumbered. All of the other teams LBs and extra DBs can be committed to coverage basically.

Just about every time that Rodgers escapes the rush and buys more time he completes a pass to an open guy. That's because that is how long it takes for the receivers to get through all of that extra coverage. If we can ever make it to where teams have to blitz to get pressure this offense will just explode.
blank
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (1h) : Merry Christmas!
beast (9h) : Merry Christmas 🎄🎁
beast (17h) : Sounds like no serious injuries from the Saints game and Jacobs and Watson should play in the Vikings game
packerfanoutwest (22h) : both games Watson missed, Packers won
Martha Careful (24-Dec) : I hope all of you have a Merry Christmas!
Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol
buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier
buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol
Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Jacobs gonna be OK???
Zero2Cool (24-Dec) : Watson gonna be OK???
packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath
packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.
packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I just checked. What tie breaker?
bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ahh, ok.
bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes due to tie breaker
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?
bboystyle (23-Dec) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference
Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network
beast (23-Dec) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th
beast (23-Dec) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.
bboystyle (23-Dec) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed
Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno
beast (23-Dec) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?
packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I see what you did there Mucky
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : dammit. 3:25pm
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm
Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground
Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Yeah baby!
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.
beast (23-Dec) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.
packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : ok I stand corrected
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
beast (23-Dec) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
beast (23-Dec) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
beast (23-Dec) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
beast (23-Dec) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality
beast (23-Dec) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

13h / GameDay Threads / bboystyle

19h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

20h / Random Babble / beast

24-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

23-Dec / Random Babble / Martha Careful

22-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

19-Dec / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

17-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.