Now this can't be good.....A-12's concern for players preparation......

I think we discussed this in another thread.

Welcome to the new format Goldie.

How's it look on your iPad?

Shoot Boris,  I see I'm still behind the eight ball posting this.  New format is ok, looks less busy.  Hopefully I get used to it.     Thanks for all the work you do on the site. 

At this point it may deserve its own thread.  One has to wonder WTH is going in that locker room and what in particular are the coaches doing if they are this unprepared?   Is the shift in coaching responsibilities too much not just for Clements but the whole chain of offensive coaches?

Well, now that we've brougth it up....I am also a little disappointed in the preperation some of our posters are doing on this site.  You'd think they would take the time to read previous posts and make posts that are on topic with what is being discussed, and not go off on some tangent.

Really nothing wrong with his comments. I see leadership, not concern.

"It goes back to what you're doing in your spare time and what you're doing with your time in the facility," Rodgers said. "Being a pro is all about making sure you're as ready as possible by the time the game hits. I think that's the important thing for guys to remember here, especially young guys.

"We're 15 games into the season, counting preseason. That's a long grind for those guys, especially the rookies. This is the time where they really got to get through that wall, and the vets -- the vets have had some [missed assignments] as well. So we've got to buckle down our preparation and make sure we're ready to play."

Did you see what I did there?

Actually, I have often wondered how much difference there is in this kind of focus between teams.  Are there some teams where video games and strip clubs are the accepted practice for young players and others that are strictly business and reading the playbook.  I would think that, as professionals making a ton of money, the expectations would be pretty high.  But, who inforces this, and how?  Is it the coaches?  Is it the experienced players?

 One would think that if winning is really the priority (maybe for some it isn't and its just $) that everyone would be putting in the extra time.  I guess, it comes down to this mythical concept of a "winning culture".  I find it hard to believe that a team with the success the Packers have had for the last decade and a half doesn't have a winning culture by default.

Re: Henry's last point, I've been thinking it's not unlike when an offensive lineman goes down and, instead of just putting in the next man up, you shuffle the other players' positions too. Instead of weakening one position you've weakened them all.  

(Question: who the hell is in the ear of the WRs during practices? Beat reporters say Van Pelt is always with the QBs.)

The locker room? Bad juju. I'd really thought this group was above and beyond all that. I'm coming around more and more to the idea that Seattle caused a lot of cracks to form and this season we're seeing ruptures.

Wouldn't lump him in with Bayless (yet), but I'm getting the impression that Florio isn't really an AR admirer. 

Florio is a Vikings' shill from way back.

justanotherpackerfan posted:

Did you see what I did there?

 

Actually, I have often wondered how much difference there is in this kind of focus between teams.  Are there some teams where video games and strip clubs are the accepted practice for young players and others that are strictly business and reading the playbook.  I would think that, as professionals making a ton of money, the expectations would be pretty high.  But, who inforces this, and how?  Is it the coaches?  Is it the experienced players?

 One would think that if winning is really the priority (maybe for some it isn't and its just $) that everyone would be putting in the extra time.  I guess, it comes down to this mythical concept of a "winning culture".  I find it hard to believe that a team with the success the Packers have had for the last decade and a half doesn't have a winning culture by default.

 

Good points, but aren't they "scrip" clubs, not strip clubs.  That's what Pacman Jones taught us.

Coming from the guy that all but accused Rodgers of lighting a cancer patient on fire, yeah.  I don't put much stock in his ****ing opinion and bull**** conjecture but something is afoot in that locker room.  Big part is injuries but it's also guys not stepping up to fill the void.  These are the guys that are supposed to be hungry.  

Florio's about as useful as dick lint, but one of the drawbacks of TT's "Logan's Run"-style roster building can be a lack of good, veteran leadership also. Woodson was "in your face", sure, but Tramon seemed to be a consumate pro, for example. With Jordy out, Cobb is the "elder statesman" of the receiving corps. Has that made a negative impact? 

"dick lint" 

Wearing some pretty fuzzy boxers there.  Nobody likes pee hole lint. 

MM also has what I cannot describe as anything else but a phobia in sticking with the run. Even when it's going well (e.g. the last 2 weeks), he just can't stick with it. And yes there has been talk of AR checking out of some run plays, but MM has a long standing history of going back to "throw it, throw it, throw it". He's also openly stated a MULTITUDE of times he doesn't believe in giving one RB 25-30 carries a game.

And sadly, that's precisely what Lacy needs and what he was built to do.

But when Lacy fumbles. They abandon the run

Stupid comments from Florio. Star QBs call out other players all the time. Favre did it constantly with his receivers. He pinned the blame on the Bill Schroeders and Robert Fergusons for his INTs more often than not. I'd say that's a lot worse than trying to encourage your teammates to study more film.

GBFanForLife posted:

But when Lacy fumbles. They abandon the run

I wouldn't say they abondonded it, but they didn't leverage it while it was working.

After the fumble to when they were down only 1.

9 runs

15 passes

GB drive after CHI FG made the score 17-13

3 runs

5 passes

Last two GBP drives were within the 4 minute mark....

3 passes, INT

9 passes, downs

The 3 stooges - Bayless, Florio, Cowherd.

Hey, let's give the three stooges more credit than that....they at least had an intellectual level to their comedy

Very interesting longform read on 12 this season by Mike Freeman. Lots of nuggets therein. Lots.

http://bleacherreport.com/arti...rs-saved-the-packers

"The greatest form of disrespect to a receiving corps," said ESPN analyst Brian Dawkins on NFL Live this month, "is for a team to play Cover 0. That means they put no safety in the middle of the football field. ... That's what the Detroit Lions did [in the first game against the Packers]."

"People that try to blame Aaron are fools," Fox analyst Troy Aikman, who has seen a number of Packers games this year, told me recently. "I already had so much respect for Aaron but even more after thatDenver game. I saw after the game where Aaron said he had to make better throws. Then I went and watched the tape and none of their receivers were open. They were blanketed. He had no one to throw to.

"One thing I will say is the hits he's taking are having an effect on his throwing, and that's something that has happened to all of us [NFL quarterbacks]. I saw him miss throws in the Carolina game that he would otherwise never miss. In that game, he was hit a lot, and some of what is happening is that when you get hit, you tend to start throwing the ball a little earlier.

"What I mainly see with Aaron is a guy with a lot of courage and talent who is putting the Packers on his back and carrying them. Aaron is all the Packers have right now."

Why was Rodgers able to go 6-0 with basically the same personnel? The answer, say defensive assistants who have gone against the Packers, is that early on the season, teams strategized with Rodgers the way they always do. They played soft defenses designed not to give up the big play.

But eventually defenses started taking more chances in man-to-man coverage, noticing that Rodgers' receivers were being given coverages they didn't deserve. Defenses started playing tighter man-to-man, and game film of this started to circulate. Teams started taking chances, successfully, and a trend was born.

"Their receivers," one AFC scout said, "are probably bottom five in the league."

"You could cover Davante Adams," another AFC scout said.

Ouch. I hope our receivers read this and do something about it.

Good piece by Freeman. The question remains why there was apparently a lack of schematic adjustment by the Packer coaching staff in an attempt to deal with the inadequacies of the receiving corp. The loss of Jordy reveled a serious lack of imagination in the offensive braintrust.

I don't know if it's an inability to adjust but a refusal to. The quote calling the group bottom five in the league seems a bit extreme, but it's tough to argue with the opinion given the results.

2. How many QBs could throw the Aaron Rodgers Hail Mary?

Aaron Rodgers' amazing throw to beat the Lions remains one of the most talked-about plays this season. It will be one of the most talked-about plays in the history of the sport.

I've marveled at it, and in response, the usual haters have emerged to say the throw wasn't a big deal. In fact, I had many on Twitter telling me any quarterback in football could make it. So I decided to put that stupid notion to the test.

What makes the throw amazing is that it happens on four different planes. First, Rodgers escapes. Second, the distance. Third, the accuracy. Fourth, and most important, is the arc of the football.

So let's play this game. And I must say, first, this is not an exact science. It's likely I will miss a name or two, or a get a few wrong. But I think this is pretty good. I tried to stick with starters.

In terms of the first category, escapability, I'm eliminating the following quarterbacks: Carson Palmer, Tom Brady, Philip Rivers, Matt Ryan, Peyton and Eli Manning, Andy Dalton, Matt Stafford, Kirk Cousins, Jay Cutler, Matt Hasselbeck, Brock Osweiler, Matt Cassel, Matt Schaub, Blaine Gabbert, Josh McCown, Sam Bradford and Nick Foles.

Right there, 18 quarterbacks are eliminated. You can quibble with some, sure, but I think all of those players would have been sacked. Brady is so slow, he would have been sacked twice.

(Note: I'm going to include Tony Romo for giggles, despite his being out for the year. He makes that first cut.)

Roger Steinman/Associated Press

The next category is distance. How many could throw the football over 60 yards in the air? This one is trickier, but my experience is that not many quarterbacks can launch it as far as people think.

I'm eliminating: Drew Brees, Ryan Fitzpatrick, Alex Smith, Marcus Mariota, Teddy Bridgewater, Brian Hoyer, Tyrod Taylor and Nick Foles.

So that's 26 gone. We are down to, approximately: Romo, Ben Roethlisberger, Ryan Tannehill, Russell Wilson, Derek Carr, Jameis Winston, Cam Newton and Andrew Luck (including him since he'll likely start again this season).

On to the third category, which is accuracy. Gone are Tannehill (who has trouble hitting targets 20 yards away), Luck (who has been an interception machine lately), Newton, Romo, Carr and Winston.

We are down to just Wilson and Roethlisberger. The hardest part of Rodgers' throw was the arc. His football nearly hit the rafters in the building.

That high toss is purposeful. It allows the football to drop out of the sky instead of traveling on a flatter course that would make it easier to knock down.

This one is close, but I don't think Wilson can throw it that high and that far.

That leaves Roethlisberger as the only guy playing now who I think, in addition to Rodgers, could make that throw.

(I did forget Blake Bortles and Joe Flacco. I think both have the mobility and arm strength—but not the accuracy.)

3. And what about in history?

Jeffrey Phelps/Associated Press

I think it comes down to a handful of names. I went to players in the Hall of Fame since I think only Hall of Fame-caliber talent could make that throw. These are the names (and remember the four categories): John Elway, Roger Staubach, Fran Tarkenton and Steve Young. And maybe Brett Favre.

2011 (for most games)          2015 (for most games)

WR1: Jennings          WR1: Cobb

WR2: Nelson          WR2: Adams

WR3: Cobb          WR3: Jones (declining) 

WR4: Jones          WR4: Janis (don't trust)

WR5: Driver (declining)          WR5: no one (injuries)

TE1: Finley          TE2: Richard Rodgers

Objectively, unless Richard Rodgers last game was truly his emergence, it might be too much to call that group better than even 4 other groups in the NFL.

Didn't brint come close to throwing one out of the LA Coliseum during practice early in his career? 

michiganjoe posted:

Good piece by Freeman. The question remains why there was apparently a lack of schematic adjustment by the Packer coaching staff in an attempt to deal with the inadequacies of the receiving corp. The loss of Jordy reveled a serious lack of imagination in the offensive braintrust.

Exactly. If our receivers can not get open running individual "route trees", you have to find ways to scheme them open. I know some coaches are very reluctant to change their schemes, but being flexible & adapting to your personnel is an admirable characteristic. The scouting report on the Panthers when we played them spoke to Rivera's ability to change many aspects of their offense when their #1 receiver was lost in the preseason. 

A lot more in that article than just player preparation and bad receivers.  Freeman opines that there is NO talent around him.  Without AR we're the Browns.  That's going a bit far but he sure paints a damning picture of the job TT has been doing since 2010.

Scheme is not a cure all.  The players still have to win their 1-on-1's.  How good has NE's passing game been (you know the one with all the picks and bubble screens) since Gronk has been in the tub?  Compared to when he was ballin...

packerboi posted:

 

2. How many QBs could throw the Aaron Rodgers Hail Mary?

... I think it comes down to a handful of names. I went to players in the Hall of Fame since I think only Hall of Fame-caliber talent could make that throw. These are the names (and remember the four categories): John Elway, Roger Staubach, Fran Tarkenton and Steve Young. And maybe Brett Favre.

 

Dude must've never seen Tark play. He could never make that throw. 

Neither could Steve Young. 

Elway could get it that far and that high but wouldn't hit the target. Likely the same result with 4 (although the Detroit playoff throw to Sharpe belies that).

Roger Staubach could do g-d anything on a football field with a game on the line so I'm say he could do it  .

Actually I think Ben and Rodgers might in fact be the only two.

There are several guys I can think of that could clearly throw it that far and maneuver to escape the rush - but accuracy would have been an issue.

Michael Vick, Randall Cunningham, Jeff George.

I watched Tarkenton play. No way he throws it that far.

Considered a big statement: Brett stated that A-Rod is better than he (Favre) ever was. (Considering the subject of the article, I would assume in leadership.)

Article

1. More corroboration that Buddy Nix was right.

2. We've been so damned lucky as Packers fans the last 23 years. Both QBs are HoF talents and great leaders. Read LeRoy Butler's accounts of Favre in the locker room. 

"He's better than I ever was," Favre said. "I think he's quietly one of the best leaders in this game. I don't know if people understand that."

WTF!?!?!? I don't believe what I just read!

4's no dummy. Packer fans will keep his family rolling in dough forever if he plays his cards right. A little magnanimity goes a long way.