isocleas2
8 years ago

At this time, Rodgers is only demanding coverage from a linebacker and sometimes not even the best LB on the field.

Originally Posted by: Yerko 



Checkout the first post on page 2 from barfan, he listed that of the 85 attempted passes thrown Rodgers way only around 1/3rd of them was he covered by just a linebacker. You're not the first to post this fallacy that Rodgers is too slow to beat Linebacker coverage, but imo it doesn't hold much water.

Also the Detroit game is the only one of the season where they used Rodgers on more routes to attack the center of the field so I think its probably the best example to use if you want to prove that Rodgers does have the speed to be a #1 he just wasn't be utilized correctly.
Rockmolder
8 years ago

How about the GBPs start putting weapons on the field at every position possible? I hate this thread because it is just another feeble attempt to try and make a star out of mediocrity. RR has good hands and is an adequate blocker. That is it, nothing more needs to be said. He can't break a tackle and can't outrun anybody. At best he is a #2 tight end in this league. If he catches two passes a game and gets a first down, damn, he did his job.

Would everybody please quit trying to make this kid into something he isn't. With his skill level, he should have been a sixth rounder, not a third. Thanks Ted.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



I agree. He didn't show anything special in college, didn't show anything at the combine, but I imagine we drafted him hoping he was on his way up after going from TE to WR, back to TE again. He put up somewhat decent numbers in his junior year.

I don't see why Ted felt he had to reach for him, though. Maybe he panicked, with guys like Niklas and Fiedorowicz going a bit earlier than he might've expected.

Of course, it's easy to say this in hindsight. Nick Collins looked like a ridiculous reach, as well. Thing is, nothing pointed towards anything more than average for Rodgers.
Porforis
8 years ago

How about the GBPs start putting weapons on the field at every position possible? I hate this thread because it is just another feeble attempt to try and make a star out of mediocrity. RR has good hands and is an adequate blocker. That is it, nothing more needs to be said. He can't break a tackle and can't outrun anybody. At best he is a #2 tight end in this league. If he catches two passes a game and gets a first down, damn, he did his job.

Would everybody please quit trying to make this kid into something he isn't. With his skill level, he should have been a sixth rounder, not a third. Thanks Ted.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



I don't get the point of this comment. The Packers are clearly not trying to put people who are not weapons at every position possible. Unless you suggest that Ted is deliberately trying to sabotage the team. There is zero room for any conversation here.

The questions are, which positions are the Packers lacking at (Can be looked at fairly objectively via stats/rankings) and out of those positions, which of those positions have available free agents who are likely (based on previous performance) to provide the Packers some much-needed improvement? We can point fingers at players left and right and say that we should get someone better based on past performance and the discussion's done in 10 seconds.. But, what are the Packers supposed to do about it?

This is extremely complicated as...
Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results
A player's performance is impacted by the players around him, how he's used in the scheme, and the scheme/coaching in general.

Once you estimate the player's potential impact on the Packers, you need to factor in...
How much of an improvement is the player over the player he's "replacing"? Does it make any sense for the likely asking price?

Once you've gone through every possible player you'd want to pick up...
Out of the Packers' available cap space after figuring all the players you're resigning this year or future years, which of these players do you want to sign?
In the upcoming draft, what players are available that may partially or completely negate the need for any of the previously determined free agent signings?
If you're say, selecting a TE in the draft but you're expecting him to not be starting-quality in his first year, how much of an impact does this have on your desired FA TE's overall value to the team? Is it worth the salary for a player you're only going to have for a year or are you better off sticking with your current TE? Does signing the FA pressure you to use said FA more than is necessarily justified, hampering the draftee's playing time and development?

So basically, who should the Packers go out and grab, how much are the Packers going to have to pay for him, how long should we sign him for, how much/what kind of an improvement should we expect and why, and why do you think all these things?

nerdmann
8 years ago
Here's another question: Why did they only use him that way in that ONE game?
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
yooperfan
8 years ago

Here's another question: Why did they only use him that way in that ONE game?

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 


That would appear to be a coaching issue.
It would be interesting to hear McCarthy's explanation of that.
Of course we will never know.

Barfarn
  • Barfarn
  • Senior Member Topic Starter
8 years ago

Here's another question: Why did they only use him that way in that ONE game?

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 



I would guess that Mike McCarthy wanted to put something on tape to distract the futures D. Coordinators, or the saw something they could exploit in Detroit's secondary.

That would appear to be a coaching issue.
It would be interesting to hear McCarthy's explanation of that.
Of course we will never know.

Originally Posted by: yooperfan 



It's not a coaching issue; it's maximization of talent.

Obviously Rodgers is not Gronk or an in prime tony Gonzalez or Gates and ya cant have 5 guys running thru the middle. The primary purpose of, for example, having a guy running a 5 yard hook on 1st and 10, is cause 2 hook-zone defenders to gravitate to him, thus opening a hole in front of a receiver on the 2nd level. And similarly in a man situation the reason why you run a 5 yard hook is for the same purpose [to draw one or more defenders to the hook; or, for example, draw in a LB and/or a safety to the hook to keep that defender from jumping a slant]. But a secondary reason is that you dont want, for example, A and B crossing, and the ball goes to Receiver A before the cross and having B's defender come off already running full speed to decapitate A. The hooks cause defenders to guard flat-flooted so they are not already running toward a receiver that just caught a ball. This slows them from getting into the action and preserves the long term heath of the receiving corp by reducing the violence of collisions.

Now if your play calls for Rodgers and Cobb [or Rodgers and Nelson] to run a Hook and slant or a hook and drag route combo; which one would you have run the hook? Rodgers most of the time, right? Mike McCarthy is maximizing talent by limiting Rodgers' opportunities running through the middle; but Rodgers is not 100% threatless when doing it.
nerdmann
8 years ago

I would guess that Mike McCarthy wanted to put something on tape to distract the futures D. Coordinators, or the saw something they could exploit in Detroit's secondary.



It's not a coaching issue; it's maximization of talent.

Obviously Rodgers is not Gronk or an in prime tony Gonzalez or Gates and ya cant have 5 guys running thru the middle. The primary purpose of, for example, having a guy running a 5 yard hook on 1st and 10, is cause 2 hook-zone defenders to gravitate to him, thus opening a hole in front of a receiver on the 2nd level. And similarly in a man situation the reason why you run a 5 yard hook is for the same purpose [to draw one or more defenders to the hook; or, for example, draw in a LB and/or a safety to the hook to keep that defender from jumping a slant]. But a secondary reason is that you dont want, for example, A and B crossing, and the ball goes to Receiver A before the cross and having B's defender come off already running full speed to decapitate A. The hooks cause defenders to guard flat-flooted so they are not already running toward a receiver that just caught a ball. This slows them from getting into the action and preserves the long term heath of the receiving corp by reducing the violence of collisions.

Now if your play calls for Rodgers and Cobb [or Rodgers and Nelson] to run a Hook and slant or a hook and drag route combo; which one would you have run the hook? Rodgers most of the time, right? Mike McCarthy is maximizing talent by limiting Rodgers' opportunities running through the middle; but Rodgers is not 100% threatless when doing it.

Originally Posted by: Barfarn 



I suspect it was because he was out of shape.

Mike will sit a guy or hold a guy out if he's not down the program. But TE was really thin this year. Therefore I think he had to play him, but did so in a limited fashion. Mike's held guys out before.

There seems to have been an issue with young players this year. Eddie Lacy being the obvious example, but also RR, as per his dad's claim that he was playing at 275. Possibly Davante as well. Aaron called him out during the middle of the season. It's weird tho, after having called Davante the offseason MVP.

The issue with Janis was between the ears.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
Barfarn
  • Barfarn
  • Senior Member Topic Starter
8 years ago

I agree. He didn't show anything special in college, didn't show anything at the combine, but I imagine we drafted him hoping he was on his way up after going from TE to WR, back to TE again. He put up somewhat decent numbers in his junior year.

I don't see why Ted felt he had to reach for him, though. Maybe he panicked, with guys like Niklas and Fiedorowicz going a bit earlier than he might've expected.

Originally Posted by: Rockmolder 



If you would watch the Detroit game and compared “uber” athlete Ebron and R.Rod running across the middle, you would have no idea that one ran a 4.87 and one ran a 4.60 at combine, NO IDEA WHATSOEVER. And the fact is .27 seconds over 40 yards in underwear don’t mean squat.

Drafting is about PROJECTION, the combine time a player runs in his skivvies is a minute piece of information used to determine how a college player’s speed PROJECTS to the NFL. Once the player has 2 years of tape in the NFL, this skivvies speed is 100% MEANINGLESS information. But, it is the cornerstone of so many opinions.

To date, Rodgers is CLEARLY the most productive TE in the 2014 draft; but six were taken ahead of him. This is because of Ted Thompson learned something very special about Rodgers: that he has incredible football acumen; he could break down route concepts right on the spot, he is a detail oriented, business-minded, hard worker and an egoless teammate. Then the projection was realized as Rodgers performed an amazing/special feat in learning route combos in this system as well as all the run and pass blocking calls.

Rodgers is an example of TT’s comparable genius!

And I'll say it again; if Aaron Rodgers had his typical great year, Rodgers gets 850 yards in 2015 on 70 catches for a 12 yrd avg and the reach comments and combine speed go away. Opinions should be based on evaluation of play not stats or measurables.
Rockmolder
8 years ago

If you would watch the Detroit game and compared “uber” athlete Ebron and R.Rod running across the middle, you would have no idea that one ran a 4.87 and one ran a 4.60 at combine, NO IDEA WHATSOEVER. And the fact is .27 seconds over 40 yards in underwear don’t mean squat.

Drafting is about PROJECTION, the combine time a player runs in his skivvies is a minute piece of information used to determine how a college player’s speed PROJECTS to the NFL. Once the player has 2 years of tape in the NFL, this skivvies speed is 100% MEANINGLESS information. But, it is the cornerstone of so many opinions.

To date, Rodgers is CLEARLY the most productive TE in the 2014 draft; but six were taken ahead of him. This is because of Ted Thompson learned something very special about Rodgers: that he has incredible football acumen; he could break down route concepts right on the spot, he is a detail oriented, business-minded, hard worker and an egoless teammate. Then the projection was realized as Rodgers performed an amazing/special feat in learning route combos in this system as well as all the run and pass blocking calls.

Rodgers is an example of TT’s comparable genius!

And I'll say it again; if Aaron Rodgers had his typical great year, Rodgers gets 850 yards in 2015 on 70 catches for a 12 yrd avg and the reach comments and combine speed go away. Opinions should be based on evaluation of play not stats or measurables.

Originally Posted by: Barfarn 



There were five TEs picked before Rodgers. One of them was on his way to a better season in Austin Seferian-Jenkins before getting injured. Jace Amaro was clearly the better player with more upside last year, before going down in the pre-season. I also don't see how Rodgers is CLEARLY more productive than Ebron.

I also never said it was about his 40. It's about looking average at best at every single drill, combined with an average college career, which resulted in him being projected as an average player. That very much seems like a spot on prediction to me right now.

But fair enough. Let's ignore all that for now. On all the coaches film I've seen, he just looks sluggish at times. A lot of his receptions come not from beating his man, but from Aaron running around and creating something. He struggles to get seperation from guys like Josh Bynes and has this problem consistently.... I have to go to work now, but I could go on and on. Going on smarts and sinsight alone doesn't get you to the top in the NFL. If so, I imagine you'd be in the league right now, Barfarn.

He's not bad. I'm not saying he is. He's just an average TE. A Donald Lee. A type of player we're used to, but who just isn't that great.
DakotaT
8 years ago

There were five TEs picked before Rodgers. One of them was on his way to a better season in Austin Seferian-Jenkins before getting injured. Jace Amaro was clearly the better player with more upside last year, before going down in the pre-season. I also don't see how Rodgers is CLEARLY more productive than Ebron.

I also never said it was about his 40. It's about looking average at best at every single drill, combined with an average college career, which resulted in him being projected as an average player. That very much seems like a spot on prediction to me right now.

But fair enough. Let's ignore all that for now. On all the coaches film I've seen, he just looks sluggish at times. A lot of his receptions come not from beating his man, but from Aaron running around and creating something. He struggles to get seperation from guys like Josh Bynes and has this problem consistently.... I have to go to work now, but I could go on and on. Going on smarts and sinsight alone doesn't get you to the top in the NFL. If so, I imagine you'd be in the league right now, Barfarn.

He's not bad. I'm not saying he is. He's just an average TE. A Donald Lee. A type of player we're used to, but who just isn't that great.

Originally Posted by: Rockmolder 



His lack of speed and athleticism has nothing to do with anything, now it's his football acumen that makes him a future All Pro. 😂 What I know is that we had a huge hole at TE going into last offseason, it was not corrected, and we have a huge hole at TE going into this offseason. Get on it Ted.

I'll let all the football geniuses dissect RR's greatness. I'll start agreeing with them when he can catch a slant over the middle taking it 50 yards to the house. So that'll be never. 😂
UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
packerfanoutwest (22m) : Feliz Navidad!
Zero2Cool (5h) : Merry Christmas!
beast (13h) : Merry Christmas 🎄🎁
beast (21h) : Sounds like no serious injuries from the Saints game and Jacobs and Watson should play in the Vikings game
packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : 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
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
2h / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

13h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

13h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17h / GameDay Threads / bboystyle

23h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

24-Dec / 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

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