Here’s the concerning part, it feels like the offense has regressed in the 4th quarter of the season.
Maybe im wrong but I feel like it started slow, started running smooth about half way when Adams was out and now has gone back to slightly better than weeks 1-4.
ChilliJon posted:Did Lazard flatten his route? Yes. Should he have flattened that route to ensure he kept separation? Yes. Did Rodgers throw to a spot the route should have gone? Yes. Technically everyone did what they were supposed to do perfectly.
Lazard would have still been open, although less so, had he not flattened the route. In your scenario are you implying Rodgers misread the DBs?
I guess the best short answer is, yes.
Timmy! posted:I hope no one minds if I dedicate this season to Antiworst and Phaedrus.
I don't care if it's ugly, just win, baby!
I'm cool with it!
So Rodger's inaccurate pass in the end zone to Davante Adams late in the first half against Minnesota was due to a new scheme and a crappy corps of WR's. Keeping in mind it was about a 5 yard pass and he was off by ~2-3 feet.
Maybe it's convincing because it's a diatribe.
MichiganPacker2 posted:Lazard wasn't really open on the TD, he's just such a big guy that he jumped over a very good corner in Slay and caught a post that he was well covered on.
Charles Davis' call on that play was hilarious...
"Rodgers put the cookie jar on the top shelf where the kids can't get to it."
😆
I totally get why Lazard was such a perplexing guy to figure out coming out of college. In theory he's a TE that's missing 20lbs because he's great at getting open. It's a natural thing for him. He's a chain mover. But he runs like a deer and maybe that translates to WR but he's a free spirit and runs his routes to find open holes in the defense because he's great at it. He's a nightmare for his QB to figure out but you kind of want him because he's always a threat. And you don't really want to tell him to cleaner patterns because he knows how to get open on his own. He's a good problem to have without an easy solution.
phaedrus posted:So Rodger's inaccurate pass in the end zone to Davante Adams late in the first half against Minnesota was due to a new scheme and a crappy corps of WR's. Keeping in mind it was about a 5 yard pass and he was off by ~2-3 feet.
Maybe it's convincing because it's a diatribe.
What could potentially be the problem with taking one play and generalizing it to all plays.
You wouldn't say his 33 yarder to Adams to end the first half meant Rodgers had everything fixed.
Exactly Chili. I could be wrong, but I think a couple years from now he'll be doing great, great things in Green Bay.
Boris posted:MichiganPacker2 posted:Lazard wasn't really open on the TD, he's just such a big guy that he jumped over a very good corner in Slay and caught a post that he was well covered on.Charles Davis' call on that play was hilarious...
"Rodgers put the cookie jar on the top shelf where the kids can't get to it."
😆
Rick Jeanneret " Top Shelf where Mama hides the cookies!
phaedrus posted:So Rodger's inaccurate pass in the end zone to Davante Adams late in the first half against Minnesota was due to a new scheme and a crappy corps of WR's. Keeping in mind it was about a 5 yard pass and he was off by ~2-3 feet.
Maybe it's convincing because it's a diatribe.
Diatribes should be pretty easy to dismantle. Your love of conspiracies and stats fall into the same easily dismissed category. Funny how those two can be quite similar pseudo intellectual garbage.
ChilliJon posted:I totally get why Lazard was such a perplexing guy to figure out coming out of college. In theory he's a TE that's missing 20lbs because he's great at getting open. It's a natural thing for him. He's a chain mover. But he runs like a deer and maybe that translates to WR but he's a free spirit and runs his routes to find open holes in the defense because he's great at it. He's a nightmare for his QB to figure out but you kind of want him because he's always a threat. And you don't really want to tell him to cleaner patterns because he knows how to get open on his own. He's a good problem to have without an easy solution.
I think Rodgers is very on board with it considering his targets and communication with Rodgers on what he can do now. It’s the kind of controlled chaos that could put a defense on its heels in a hurry. I think that’s why he would make an excellent #3 (for now) if they added another legit WR next to Adams.
Totally co-sign that a disciplined route running WR behind Adams is missing. I'm just trying to say Lazard is a nightmare if Rodgers figures out what Lazard is doing. The only guy that takes Lazard out of a completion is Lazard.... after he runs himself wide open. He's never where he's supposed to be. He's where he needs to be.
ChilliJon posted:Totally co-sign that a disciplined route running WR behind Adams is missing. I'm just trying to say Lazard is a nightmare if Rodgers figures out what Lazard is doing. The only guy that takes Lazard out of a completion is Lazard.... after he runs himself wide open. He's never where he's supposed to be. He's where he needs to be.
Yeah compare that to the mind meld that Jordy and ARod have. If they ever link up like that, holy cow....
El-Nuke-the-Hurricanes-Bong posted:phaedrus posted:So Rodger's inaccurate pass in the end zone to Davante Adams late in the first half against Minnesota was due to a new scheme and a crappy corps of WR's. Keeping in mind it was about a 5 yard pass and he was off by ~2-3 feet.
Maybe it's convincing because it's a diatribe.
What could potentially be the problem with taking one play and generalizing it to all plays.
You wouldn't say his 33 yarder to Adams to end the first half meant Rodgers had everything fixed.
Yeah, I agree. But, there are other plays. The Seattle game the year before. A two yard (or so) pass that landed on the ground maybe a yard in front of the receiver.
Henry posted:phaedrus posted:So Rodger's inaccurate pass in the end zone to Davante Adams late in the first half against Minnesota was due to a new scheme and a crappy corps of WR's. Keeping in mind it was about a 5 yard pass and he was off by ~2-3 feet.
Maybe it's convincing because it's a diatribe.
Diatribes should be pretty easy to dismantle. Your love of conspiracies and stats fall into the same easily dismissed category. Funny how those two can be quite similar pseudo intellectual garbage.
Now, you are just being silly. All I have been saying of late in this thread is I am perplexed with the idea that Rodger's inaccuracy issues are a result of poor receivers and a new scheme.
In which case, the level to which I resorted to some kind of conspiracy is zero and the level to which I referred to stats is zero. Of course, since you categorized my "pseudo intellectual garbage" in your latest post as pertaining to the above two categories (conspiracy theories and stats) is - drum roll - ZERO!!!
To be candid, I think generally your knowledge of football significantly exceeds my own, but you kind of laid a whopper of an egg here!
phaedrus posted:Yeah, I agree. But, there are other plays. The Seattle game the year before. A two yard (or so) pass that landed on the ground maybe a yard in front of the receiver.
This is the problem using anecdotes in place of data
I'm not arguing that Rodgers has secretly been amazing this year, but he isn't close to the washed up QB some make him out to be.
I've never said he is washed up. I just said his accuracy has lessened and I am unsure why (not sold on the "crappy receivers + new scheme" hypothesis).
career completion percentage - 64.6%
2019 completion percentage - 62% *,**
*I think this is a noteworthy drop
** I hypothesize this drop is due to age, scheme and receiver talent.
EL-blah-blah-blah-blah-blah:
This is the problem using anecdotes in place of data
I am only bothering for shits and giggles.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence
Anecdotal evidence is evidence from anecdotes: evidence collected in a casual or informal manner and relying heavily or entirely on personal testimony.The term is sometimes used in a legal context to describe certain kinds of testimony which are uncorroborated by objective, independent evidence such as notarized documentation, photographs, audio-visual recordings, etc.
Sure, I could be suffering from the limitations of such data (anecdotal evidence is data) being compromised. Maybe in that Seattle game, the ball was actually in the receiver's hands. Maybe against the Vikings in the pass I refer to, Rodgers really led Adam's perfectly and being anecdotal, in this case my version of things is seriously off-base.
But, I don't think so.
The only thing I see that is lacking is the low number of data (yes, data) points I volunteered.
Henry posted:Can't get reps if two of your main receivers either aren't WRs or weren't on the team. Pretty sure they weren't using or were planning to use the new WRB position until they had to.Why? Because the WR corp fucking sucks.
I know we've beaten this topic to death, but a bye week is probably the best time to do it. Honest question, Henry- You've made this WRB case that it's either not the best way to approach things or not optimal. Are you speaking of putting these 2 RB's at further risk injury wise? Are you saying they're being asked to go above and beyond where the WR's should be picking up the slack? And what in your estimation is the difference between that pov vs. having multi-dimensional RB's who add that extra threat by catching balls? Or is it simply that those guys at times are split out wide and playing a position out of need they aren't accustomed to playing?
I'm looking back at the weeks where Adams was out. They were forced to make adjustments accordingly, and for the most part, nearly everyone that got snaps in those games made some type of contribution. In the midst of that, the prevailing sentiment was that the offense was finding its way sans Davante, and look out once he gets back. That hasn't happened like many of us hoped it would. In your estimation, what is the reason for the seeming slide back into a struggling at times offensive game? Did those guys all slide back into their assumed role because Adams would again be getting the lion's share of work? Did they regress again after 4 weeks because they decided to suck again? I'm asking because up until wk 17, Rodgers hadn't been missing to such extent guys that had clearly gotten separation like they did against Detroit. If they aren't in position, that's one thing. But the misses this past week were inordinately worse and increased from what I could tell.
Henry posted:So does other QBs having better completion stats make Rodgers more inaccurate? You're basing his inaccuracy on what other QBs are doing around the league.
No. Rodgers actually being more inaccurate 2015-2019 (63.1%), and even more so the last 2 years (62.2%) vs 2008-2014 (66%) is what makes him more inaccurate.
I also think that the context of pointing out, as completion % has been up the last 5 years as a whole in the NFL (63.3% 2015-2019 vs 61.1% 2008-2014), he has gone down, helps paint the larger picture.
If I said my investments went down 5% the last 5 years, without context, it's hard to know if that's good or bad! If the market was down 12% well then congrats to me; If the market was up 4%...
"much more" my ass. You can watch a game and see something's not right but yet Rodgers and team does enough to pull it out.
I agree! Something's not right, and it's not just in 2019 that something has not been right. His accuracy has declined the last 5 years and more so the last 2.
But, yes, this year they have done enough to win games, which is awesome and at the end of the day what matters! However, I've not made the argument that his decline in accuracy has cost the Packers games in 2019.
It makes me laugh how a lack of talent or inexperienced talent, a new coach with a new scheme with Rodgers and his teammates adjusting couldn't be taken into account for those lovely stats.
It could be. You could make that argument and say that explains it. Hell I put it out there in the AR not Elite thread earlier - AR with Jordy Nelson is superhuman and the easily the best QB of all time. AR without Jordy Nelson has been very good, but not really in the same tier as the AR with Jordy.
But that's just how we "feel". We've never seen other teams go through coaching transitions only to improve in the next year because there is a bigger playbook and more cohesiveness on the team. Never. Apparently, everyone just expects the system to drop into place and everything is turnkey. That's the norm. Historical data has nothing on stats.
This would be a good point if one were taking only the 2019 data to make the claim that Rodgers has been more inaccurate. Bully for me then as I've never used only 2019 data to base my statement.
13-3 with a first round bye.
How awesome, right! I'm a Vikings and Eagles fan first this Sunday!
I find it hilarious that people would defend scrub players to the death over a proven HOF QB that's going through the same transition as everyone else. Yes, Rodgers must of dropped off such a significant cliff that fucking UDFAs and flyer draft picks are clearly not an issue at all.
I, too, find arguments no one has ever made as hilarious,
I've not argued to cut Rodgers. Nor trade him. Nor bench him. I've not said I want Ryan Tannehill instead because his accuracy in 2019 was 70.3% this year. I've not said MVS and GMO are All Pro WRs and how dare he miss throws to those amazing players. I've not said DURR DANICA PATRICK. I'm not calling him trash. It's not "HURRR BRING BACK HUNDLEY." I'm not saying that there's no chance that in year 2 under a new coach we won't see a return to he was in 2008-2014. Hell, Drew Brees has just had his 2 best seasons at age 39 and 40. I’ve not said “he’s bad” or “he sucks” or “he’ll never be good again”
I've simply pointed out that by the numbers, and to anyone being honest with themselves also by the eye test, there's been a decline in his accuracy. Mind you, this is a decline vs what I would argue were the best 7 cumulative years a QB has ever produced. But, it is a decline vs his previous results. And it's a decline vs where he is vs his peers. That’s the extent of the argument. There’s no grandiose comment on his production or his skills or his work ethic or his talent or his dating habits or his commercials or his family relationships. It’s just pointing out that he has had a decline in his accuracy. That’s it.
But I get it. I dared offer the mildest of criticism of Rodgers. And, just like in 2005 and ROBERT FERGUSON RAN THE WRONG ROUTE whenever Favre threw a pick, there will always be some some folks go apoplectic at any criticism, no matter how slight, of the Packers QB.
13-3 with a broke QB. Kind of impressive, no?
All credit for 13-3 goes to Blake Martinez.
Good points made on both sides of the Rodgers argument. I don't know if it's age, receivers, mechanics, his head or something else... and quite frankly, neither does anybody else. All I know is Rodgers is flat out missing receivers that he shouldn't be missing.
He has to play better. If he does, look the fuck out. Let's hope it all comes together next Sunday night.
Henry posted:Timpranillo posted:Hungry5 posted:Has he become much more inaccurate?
Yes.
2008 - 2014 His avg finish in Comp % was 6th
2015 - 2019 His avg finish in Comp % was 17th
bdplant posted:I think he’s always been hesitant to make certain risky throws. He’s the anti-Bert....which is a good thing.
Or it could be that stats are so ridiculously cherry picked they make no sense without context.
Do you have a stat for passing scheme? How about talent drain/gain? Oh wait, #1 in separation. What about 1st year coaching efficiency? Maybe OC proclivity for wearing boxers?
Stupid made up shit just like Wall Street derivatives.
13-3 = Fact. There is no other explanation for 13-3. You cannot spin 13-3 into anything else.
Get over yourself McVincePlant.
Did you really get yourself all worked up over me saying that AR is more careful with the football than his predecessor?
You’ve become TimesFour’s drunk uncle. Drunk Uncle Henry! I guess every family has one.
Become? I thought he never stopped.
phaedrus posted:The only thing I see that is lacking is the low number of data (yes, data) points I volunteered.
I suspect you prefer to take your data this way. Easier to disregard evidence and believe what you want to believe.
El-Nuke-the-Hurricanes-Bong posted:phaedrus posted:The only thing I see that is lacking is the low number of data (yes, data) points I volunteered.
I suspect you prefer to take your data this way. Easier to disregard evidence and believe what you want to believe.
Yup, I badly want to believe Rodger's it not as accurate.
As to "taking my data this way," it's really laziness. There are other posts by other folks itemizing "more" data points (such as the number of overthrows in the Lion game).
Regardless, there is really no need and nothing to be gained by venturing into something like I believe what I want to believe.
On that count, I won't reciprocate.
Boris posted:13-3 with a broke QB. Kind of impressive, no?
Why are you conflating “decline in accuracy” with “broke”?
I think he means broke after buying that new house. 
Which, by the way, people were bringing up during the super slow start last week. Even thought it was purchased in November.
A real QB would live out on the frozen tundra.
Packiderm posted:Boris posted:MichiganPacker2 posted:Lazard wasn't really open on the TD, he's just such a big guy that he jumped over a very good corner in Slay and caught a post that he was well covered on.Charles Davis' call on that play was hilarious...
"Rodgers put the cookie jar on the top shelf where the kids can't get to it."
😆
Rick Jeanneret " Top Shelf where Mama hides the cookies!
Beat me to it. RJ is the best!
YATittle posted:
Wow, this is really compelling. From your link...
How they're better than you think: One trend that has stuck for the Packers throughout the season: They're a fundamentally different offense with Aaron Jones on the field. I referred to Green Bay's on/off splits on offense with Jones on the field earlier this year, so let's get an update.
The Packers have run 603 offensive snaps with him on the field. Those snaps have added 90.4 expected points to Green Bay's offensive output, or 0.15 expected points per play. Only two offenses in football generated more than 0.15 EPA per play this season -- the Ravens and Chiefs. With Jones on the field, the Packers are the third-most dominant offense in football.
Without Jones, though, they aren't the same. When Jamaal Williams has replaced Jones in the lineup, the Packers have generated minus-24.33 EPA across 337 snaps, or minus-0.07 EPA per play. The Williams version of the Green Bay offense ranks 29th in the NFL. Aaron Rodgers' QBR drops from 67.7 with Jones on the field to 28.7 with Williams in the lineup instead.
PA green & gold posted:AtTheMurph posted:I wish there was a better crop of Free Agent WRs coming this off season.
AJ Green, Robby Anderson and Nelson Agholor are the only three that intrigue me at all. All have had injury issues but I think would fit a need.
Green and Adams would be one hell of a pair if Green could stay on the field.
Anderson would be a definite upgrade at #2.
Agholor could be the good slot guy the team does not have.
At TE, Austin Hooper, Hunter Henry, Eric Ebron are set to be FAs. Any of the three could probably be had for less than Jimmy Graham money and all would provide more.
At ILB there are some interesting guys. If GB could sign Joe Schobert for the same money as Martinez is going to seek, I'd be all over that. Same with Cory Littleton. Hell, I'd take Kwiatkowski in a swap.
Living in the Philly area and seeing much Eagle news - I wouldn’t touch Agholor with a 100’ pole. He is injury prone and a head case - with questionable desire to play football.
AJ Green - agree he would pair great with Adams.
He's only missed 9 games in 5 years. That seems about right for a WR.
The head case stuff I get but most WRs are head cases. Reportedly Agholor has some mental problems that he was sent to see a psychiatrist early in his career. I thought he has been better since his 2nd year.
AtTheMurph posted:PA green & gold posted:AtTheMurph posted:I wish there was a better crop of Free Agent WRs coming this off season.
AJ Green, Robby Anderson and Nelson Agholor are the only three that intrigue me at all. All have had injury issues but I think would fit a need.
Green and Adams would be one hell of a pair if Green could stay on the field.
Anderson would be a definite upgrade at #2.
Agholor could be the good slot guy the team does not have.
At TE, Austin Hooper, Hunter Henry, Eric Ebron are set to be FAs. Any of the three could probably be had for less than Jimmy Graham money and all would provide more.
At ILB there are some interesting guys. If GB could sign Joe Schobert for the same money as Martinez is going to seek, I'd be all over that. Same with Cory Littleton. Hell, I'd take Kwiatkowski in a swap.
Living in the Philly area and seeing much Eagle news - I wouldn’t touch Agholor with a 100’ pole. He is injury prone and a head case - with questionable desire to play football.
AJ Green - agree he would pair great with Adams.
He's only missed 9 games in 5 years. That seems about right for a WR.
The head case stuff I get but most WRs are head cases. Reportedly Agholor has some mental problems that he was sent to see a psychiatrist early in his career. I thought he has been better since his 2nd year.
His hands are worse than MVS.
phaedrus posted:YATittle posted:Wow, this is really compelling. From your link...
How they're better than you think: One trend that has stuck for the Packers throughout the season: They're a fundamentally different offense with Aaron Jones on the field. I referred to Green Bay's on/off splits on offense with Jones on the field earlier this year, so let's get an update.
The Packers have run 603 offensive snaps with him on the field. Those snaps have added 90.4 expected points to Green Bay's offensive output, or 0.15 expected points per play. Only two offenses in football generated more than 0.15 EPA per play this season -- the Ravens and Chiefs. With Jones on the field, the Packers are the third-most dominant offense in football.
Without Jones, though, they aren't the same. When Jamaal Williams has replaced Jones in the lineup, the Packers have generated minus-24.33 EPA across 337 snaps, or minus-0.07 EPA per play. The Williams version of the Green Bay offense ranks 29th in the NFL. Aaron Rodgers' QBR drops from 67.7 with Jones on the field to 28.7 with Williams in the lineup instead.
So when it comes to the playoffs will the Packers not really be concerned with Jones' "load management"?
"expected points to Green Bay's offensive output"
Get the F out of here with this garbage. I cannot stand the tech folks coming into sports and trying to put everything into an algorithm. It does not work that way.
I don't need AI to tell me that we have a better chance of scoring with Jones on the field than Williams. Coming up with a equation that tries to put a number on it and spewing to the public as if it has any legitimate value is ridiculous. It's a guess based off of uncontrollable parameters and nothing more. Stop pretending as if it's science, it's not.
