phaedrus posted:
ChilliJon posted:

Friend in DePere that knows things tells me J’mon Moore will be the surprise this year. He also said Josh Jackson and Josh Jones will be leaving soon. Neither is fully invested. 

What's up with Josh Jackson?

Everyone claims to know stuff - until it is clear they don't.  Call me skeptical, but what else has he predicted in the past that came true? 

Maybe he knows MLF made a version of his play book called "2019 Packer Offensive Playbook for Dummies".  That could solve one thing for Moore, but what about his drops?  He couldn't catch anything under the lights at Lambeau last year on family night.  He had those problems at Missouri as well.  So how or why  will he surprise this year? 

And Josh Jones stuff has been all over the news, but prior to that being passed over for other players had to be incriminating.  So one could connect the dots there.

Why does he think Josh Jackson will be leaving soon?  Did he say?  Last year was Josh's 2nd year in any defensive backfield at any level.  The guy has room to grow - lots of it.  And with injuries last year, he needed to play some safety.  So maybe the perceived lack of a position for him to focus on is the reason?  I use the word "perceived" because the coaches may know but aren't saying.  I am asking because I don't really know.  

It would be interesting to see what "meat" he could add to that metaphorical bone.  

no, no, no, everyone must form an opinion about the two sentences and pontificate endlessly for at least two days about the possible ramifications of the sentences in all possible ways that they could conceivably be taken.   then and only then will true disinformation become clear.

I think MLF is smart enough to know, and actually has a record of, tailoring his offense to fit his talent.  He'll be working on putting AR in the best position for  success like he is for everyone else.  If they have different ideas on how to make that happen, we may have a problem.

That is a good article thanks for posting it.   Wow people sure did rush to judgement on this one acting like they were butting heads and not getting along already.

I see a lot willingness to comprise and working together to make the offense the best it can be.  I am sure the initial conversations could have been difficult but I bet they turned out well.

The Heckler posted:

I see a lot willingness to compromise and working together to make the offense the best it can be. 

There it is again.  "Happy medium," "middle ground, "compromise"(typo fixed):  No, no and no, IMO. 

There's only one General; AR is only the Captain.

Fandame posted:

 Whatcha think? 

I think folks should know better than to click on a Florio article. He's just a bitter viking fan and Packer hater. I guess he got what he wanted....clicks and over-reaction. 

I kinda love the fact that Rodgers owns a space in Florios insecure mind  

Florio's a hack and a click-baiting scumbag.  But while he definitely put his own twist on it, the quotes are the same in both articles, and the Silver piece itself recognizes there seems to be a philosophical conflict going on between AR and MLF that needs to be ironed out:

So, to summarize: Rodgers wants to take advantage of his intelligence and experience to attack defenses, and LaFleur wants him to buy into a proven system that, because of its ambitious pre-snap activity and overall philosophy, restricts the quarterback's ability (and, theoretically, his incentive) to do so.

Here's what Silva is saying is specifically the conflict.  The first paragraph is LaFrog talking about his offense and the lack of audibles, the second is what AR was hinting he still wants to do:

"I guess from what you consider the true standard of 'audibles,' you're right -- we have not had that," LaFleur said last Tuesday during a second conversation in his office. "Because, you know, we pride ourselves on having concepts that have answers for whatever. Now, it might not always be the best answer, but you have an answer. But when there are plays that are called that have maybe not a very good answer, we typically call two plays and we run one or the other, based upon the look that the defense is giving us. The quarterback chooses, and there are criteria: We try to teach him the criteria for why we would want this play over the other play."

Rodgers, of course, has spent years conjuring potential adjustments that extend well beyond the binary model. Yet even if the quarterback feels as though he has the answers at the line, there are other forces working against him: specifically, mechanical limitations and time. Many of LaFleur's play calls will require pre-snap activity, such as players going in motion, that complicate any potential departure from the script, and narrowly reduce the window on the play clock within which Rodgers must operate. Says one coach familiar with the system: "The time you actually have to change the play, on a 40-second clock, is so limited. There are so many nuances to it, that by the time you get through everything there are maybe 10 seconds at the line of scrimmage."

I'm really liking the sound of MLF's system and hope AR buys in 100%.  This "putting his stamp on it" kind of talk is for the birds.  We know all too well Rodgers wants to throw it on every play.  He needs to just run the offense and run the plays given to him.

DH13 posted:

I think MLF is smart enough to know, and actually has a record of, tailoring his offense to fit his talent.

Yup. I think MLF is installing his offense and realizes (and has said so) that he's never had a Aaron Rodgers before. Not going to allow your QB to call many audibles when he's a young RG3, Hoyer, Mariota, Gabbert, Schaub, etc...ugh. Probably going to be different play-call variations between now and week 1. 

The over-reaction caused by the florio article is creepy...skip bayless like. Maybe we should look to get Gregg Jennings take ? 

The full context of the Mike Silver article provides a more balanced insight in to what's occurring. New coach working with hall of fame QB - in June !!! 

 

El-Ka-Bong posted:

My favorite part of the last 6 years was watching the play clock go down to 1 and AR calling a rifle quick TO.  Is that going to go away?  #sadface

Exactly. Our offense had about as much rhythm as a Jewish mom.  All the audibling did was let the defense dictate what the offense was doing.  It's part of why we were so predictable, IMO.  DC's were giving looks knowing exactly how we would respond.

LaFlower has the right idea.  Keep them on their heels.  Make them respond to you, not the other way around.  I'm thinking AR will be totally on board once it starts clicking. 

"Get on board with (him) or shut up." LOL JUST KIDDING!

 

let's get everyone in time and in sync and executing the plays correctly and efficiently and THEN let's talk about options and audibles.  it's way too early for improv.  I would think AR knows that.

and, yes, sick to death of walking up to the line of scrimmage and running the play clock down to 1 second.  OL gets no rhythm or power off the line and are on their heels cuz the D knows it's time to go.

get up to the line, have a look around, start a cadence and get after it.  make the D respond to you for a change.

Add Reply

Likes (1)
YATittle
×
×
×
×