Packers Bengals. First pre season game of the year

[Yoop]

Late in his career it was. Let’s not play stupid. Every off-season everyone had mock drafts chock full of WRs.

Even Gutenbumst knows it as he drafted 6 in the last 2 years. He just did it too late when he blew it on 3 WRs in 2018 and proceeded to draft none in 2 straight drafts which is criminal in its own right, then takes just one in 2021 which was a short, unathletic bum in Amari Rodgers.

like I've said, We fans should have been treated better, we had one of the best passing QB's the league has ever seen and our GM's basically refused to keep him supplied with quality receivers, criminal is spot on.

[Scott4Pack]

By all accounts, this was a good game for the Pack. But maybe there’s a lot more to learn than we think up front. Snap counts matter a lot now.

The Love and Clifford comparison… Love is the laid back guy. Clifford plays more, by his account, on edge. See if these performances on both sides evolve over the next couple of weeks.

I’m hopeful about the energy level.

What is likely about any possible trade for a blocking TE? I feel confident with Musgrave. And maybe Kraft will play 200 snaps or so this year. But I do think we need to add a TE, in light of Davis’ injury. Either way, MLF needs to be designing offensive schemes around the shortage of a blocking TE. Maybe do something like the old U-71 that we used to do. Put an OLineman in as an eligible to block and maybe twice (once with different guys) get a pass to them.

[Yoop]

By all accounts, this was a good game for the Pack. But maybe there’s a lot more to learn than we think up front. Snap counts matter a lot now.

The Love and Clifford comparison… Love is the laid back guy. Clifford plays more, by his account, on edge. See if these performances on both sides evolve over the next couple of weeks.

I’m hopeful about the energy level.

What is likely about any possible trade for a blocking TE? I feel confident with Musgrave. And maybe Kraft will play 200 snaps or so this year. But I do think we need to add a TE, in light of Davis’ injury. Either way, MLF needs to be designing offensive schemes around the shortage of a blocking TE. Maybe do something like the old U-71 that we used to do. Put an OLineman in as an eligible to block and maybe twice (once with different guys) get a pass to them.

I envisioned that as a roll for Toms, but now he's so good he'll be a starter on the OL somewhere, I still think Dequara can do that though, imo pretty hard to design stretch zone runs minus a big guy leading the way.

so far Musgrave has shown some blocking ability as well as the ability to stretch the seam, his ability to do both would be a huge gift for the team and Love.

[go pak go]

Is it safe to post these again?

[Foosball]

The 2023 Packers are now a TEAM instead of the Aaron Rodgers side show. As good and accurate passer Rodgers is/was, he became a detriment to the team through his Prima Donna attitude. Having to “earn” his trust BS instead of just playing the game and helping your teammates.

A friend of mine knows Deguara’s grand parents. They said Deguara hates Rodgers. Can’t stand him. Take it for what you want, but the Packers are now more of a team. The coaches are probably also relieved that A-Rod is gone.

This is a different Green Bay Packers from the past 10 years. Young, fast, and talented. How can you not be excited? Yes, their inexperience will cost them over the next year or so but I see a very exciting offense with a dominant defense in the next 2-3 years.

Love has an NFL arm and appears he can run the offense. Clifford played just like he did in College…with a lot of moxie.

The question I have for down the road is; are the head coach and d-coordinator good enough? Excuse me; but I’ve seen some big deficiencies in the playoffs (when they’re playing high caliber teams and coaches). LaFleur has as much to prove as anybody in my book.

[Pckfn23]

Very interesting that many starters played a series or 2 on Friday, in sharp contrast to the last 4 years.

[lulu]

The conversation online (here and elsewhere) around Love/Clifford is the stupidest thing I've ever seen.

And it is definitely the same people who thought Sean Clifford was such a dumb draft pick that Gutey should be publicly flogged that are trying to say Clifford is pushing or going to push Jordan Love to be the starter. Like I said, some here, most elsewhere.

Just absolute dumb stuff there. Completely discrediting takes. It's tribal narrative stuff completely void of football analysis

Love is the unquestioned leader of this team. Clifford is the smart guy drafted to be a career backup with stints of starting throughout his career as long as he puts in the work on his footwork to improve his accuracy and consistency from college. There's no controversy here. They both played their roles tonight, and showed that they can be what is asked of them, and showed that they both are young and learning (and they did it against very different caliber defenders).

Yes, because we all know that a QB drafted in the 5th round or later can never expect to be more than a career backup. God, I just can't think of any QB drafted after the 5th round who ended up having a memorable career.

Seriously though, I agree that there is not a controversy. This is Love's job to lose. That being said, I think just about everyone liked what they saw out of Cliff last night (minus the pick 6). So I hope Clifford continues to impress, because it is only going to motivate Love even more.

Ingle Martin & Seneca Wallace were both taken in the 5th round, so...

[Cdragon]

2.4 second per release!?

Be interesting to see if he keeps that up, in the hopefully the half or more Love plays next game. The receivers were getting off the line and into their routes and Love is mostly popping the first read. Are they trying to show that it is a waste of time to blitz if the ball is coming out so quick? Or are we going to see longer routes and going deeper into the tree next game?

[YoHoChecko]

Be interesting to see if he keeps that up, in the hopefully the half or more Love plays next game. The receivers were getting off the line and into their routes and Love is mostly popping the first read. Are they trying to show that it is a waste of time to blitz if the ball is coming out so quick? Or are we going to see longer routes and going deeper into the tree next game?

I've heard some people mention the "first read" thing, but in the two more detailed analyses I've seen of his throws, I think the proper terminology is that he is making the correct read first. Not just throwing to the #1 read on a given play.

[bud fox]

Be interesting to see if he keeps that up, in the hopefully the half or more Love plays next game. The receivers were getting off the line and into their routes and Love is mostly popping the first read. Are they trying to show that it is a waste of time to blitz if the ball is coming out so quick? Or are we going to see longer routes and going deeper into the tree next game?

I've heard some people mention the "first read" thing, but in the two more detailed analyses I've seen of his throws, I think the proper terminology is that he is making the correct read first. Not just throwing to the #1 read on a given play.

Come on you can't be serious.

It feels like people can be watching two different games. You don't think the very least the first series was by design?

[YoHoChecko]

Come on you can't be serious.

It feels like people can be watching two different games. You don't think the very least the first series was by design?

I guess I just don't understand what you think you're saying?

Yes, the offense can, intentionally, design itself to try to get the ball out quickly.

But the people who have experience in schemes like this will walk you through every play, point out the personnel packages and route combinations, explain how the defense responds, and show that in a concept, you might have a 1-2-3 progression to one side based on one defensive alignment or a different 1-2-3 progression based on a different pre-or-post snap action by the defense.

They'll say "ok, this combination of 3 routes is called [whatever]. If you have this concept against a single-high safety or closed middle look, you do X, then Y; if the D starts or drops back into a 2-high look, then you'll do Y, then Z.

Or "if the LB moves X direction, you go to your first read; if he moves to the Y direction, you go to your second read."

I'm not a QB or an offensive coordinator. But the people who crunch film and do the work have made detailed videos showing that Love is accurately reading the defense and adjusting his progressions. He is using his eyes to help manipulate the way defenses react to the route combinations to give him the look they want.

So yes it's a quick passing game. And SOMETIMES, the play calls for Love to make one read--if the D does X, you do Y; if it does Z you do Q. But he is not running some sort of half-field, one-read, screen-and-dumpoff offense. He's commanding a complex offensive system in full control of what his options are when the defense reacts.

I'm not sure why this is controversial or anything. It's the minimum requirement to be a competent starting QB in the NFL. There's still much more to know and explore. This isn't weird optimistic homerism. It's, like, what experts are telling me about our QB's eyes and decision-making and processing of opposing defenses in the various route combinations of our offense. And it's not some sort of glowing praise that merits responses like "you can't be serious."

If you are arguing with what I'm saying, you simply haven't done the homework and analysis. These aren't super opinion-y or interpretive. While every analyst will say "I can't say for sure how it's being taught or how this specific play is intended, here is how these concepts typically work in similar schemes and QB rooms and defensive calls."

There are people who do this for a living... who have a broad depth of knowledge. And they share that knowledge with us. Only a cynic or a narcissist rejects expertise in search of an opinion or a narrative. I'm neither. Which are you?

[Pckfn23]

[bud fox]

Come on you can't be serious.

It feels like people can be watching two different games. You don't think the very least the first series was by design?

Only a cynic or a narcissist rejects expertise in search of an opinion or a narrative. I'm neither. Which are you?

A realist.

An immediate pass to the flat.
A rollout immediate pass to the flat.
An out where he didnt even look at the left side of the field.
A deep ball where he missed the open crossing receiver
A crossing receiver in musgrave that he missed completely because apparantly he did so good in trying to hold the def with his eyes - so if he is doing that plan is to go musgrave.

[YoHoChecko]

Cool so in eight passes, taking out two screen plays, we agree that he went to the correct receiver to complete the pass and move the ball at least 7 times.

Your focus is on how quickly the ball was out. Mine is on how apparent it is that he knows where the defense is and where to go with the ball.

The deep shot to Watson where he could have hit Reed I think on the middle is the only time he made the wrong DECISION in your view. And that was a very subjective call in a lot of people’s own opinions. I'd side with you if it has been third down. On 2nd, take your shot if you want it or don’t. I won’t kvetch.

You seem to think that making the decisions easier for a young QB is bad and/or that any pass thrown quickly was not a decision/read correctly made pre-snap or immediately at the snap.

I’m simply telling you that knowing where to throw the ball almost every time is a really good foundation. I don’t understand why we’re all so obsessed with minimizing or looking at the downsides of good news in our society.

We’re not seeing miscommunications with receivers or deer-in-the headlights with his decisiveness. We’re not seeing delay of games or throw-aways. We’re seeing a quick sequence of snap-evaluate-throw. That’s good. It’s not amazing. It doesn’t tell us everything. But it’s just absolute garbage to look for how everything could be bad. Realism, it is not.

Now look. He’s always has some ball placement issues which have VASTLY improved as he improves his footwork, but they still spring up here and there. Will that stay forever? Will it fade away as he contributes to progress? Will it spring up like a sure thing under pressure like it did two years ago in Kansas City?

[CWIMM]

Related to the above, I wouldn't be surprised if we keep Pearson at FB instead of a 4th TE--which is wild since rookie TEs struggle and two of our top 3 are rookies. Musgrave looks like the hands-down TE1, though, so maybe he's an exception.

I don't believe the Packers plan on keeping Deguara and a fullback in Pearson.

I will say though, Rodgers' deep ball the last 5 years has been garbage, and Love -> Watson, even though it was batted down by the DB at the last second, was just as good as anything Rodgers could come up with in the MLF era at that distance.
[/quote]

Rodgers struggled with the deep ball last season but it's not true that was the case before that.

Anyone know if Davis is OK? That hit he took looked brutal.

Davis is out for the season with a torn ACL.

I didn't watch a lot of the last quarter (I was watching the Crew). Did McGough play? If so, how did he look?

McGough played only seven snaps and didn't attempt a single pass. He lost a fumble on the only designed pass play.

I'd throw most of that Cards loss on MM for going all out to beat the Cards a week before in a meaningless game.

I don't think there's any truth to that.

The coaches are probably also relieved that A-Rod is gone.

This is a different Green Bay Packers from the past 10 years. Young, fast, and talented. How can you not be excited? Yes, their inexperience will cost them over the next year or so but I see a very exciting offense with a dominant defense in the next 2-3 years.

I'm all but convinced the coaching staff isn't happy that Rodgers isn't around anymore. I doubt Barry is capable of coordinating a dominant defense.

Cool so in eight passes, taking it two screen plays, we agree that he went to the correct receiver to complete the is and move the ball at least 7 times.

Your focus is on how quickly the ball was out. Mine is on fire accident it is that he knows where the defense is and where to go with the ball.

The deep shot to Watson where he could have hit Reed i think on the middle is the only time he made the wrong DECISION in your view. And that was a very subjective call in a lot of people’s own opinions. ID side With you if it has been third down. On 2nd, take your &%$@ if you want it or don’t. I won’t kvetch.

You seem to think that making the decisions easier for a young QB is bad and/or that any pass thrown quickly was not a decision/read correctly made pre-snap or immediately at the snap.

I’m simply telling you that knowing where to throw the ball almost every time is a really good foundation. I don’t understand why we’re all so obsessed with minimizing or looking at the downsides of good news in our society.

We’re not seeing miscommunications with receivers or deer in the headlights with his decisiveness. We’re not seeing delay of games or throw aways. We’re seeing a quick sequence of snap-evaluate-throw. That’s good. It’s not amazing. It doesn’t tell us everything. But it’s just absolute garbage to look for how everything could be bad. Realism, it is not.

Now look. He’s always has some ball placement issues which have VASTLY improved as he improves his footwork, but they still spring up here and there. Will that stay forever? Will it fade away as he contributes to progress? Will it spring up like a sure thing under pressure like it did two years ago in Kansas City?

Aside of the bad throw to Musgrave Love played well and did everything asked of him in a preseason game. With that being said I wouldn't draw any conclusions about how that will translate to the regular season as teams will game plan to take away what works for him on a regular basis. In addition he won't face backups either.

As I have mentioned repeatedly, I advocate to wait until the regular season to make any evaluation of his play.

[go pak go]

You can say "it's too early to judge" and also say "in the limited snaps Jordan received, his reads were correct and his accuracy was good for the exception of one throw"

[Yoop]

Very interesting that many starters played a series or 2 on Friday, in sharp contrast to the last 4 years.

I expected that, and so should you have, we have a lot of very young players that are expected to start on this team, thats why they played, in years past, just as with Cinnci in this game ( they sat most most of there starters) we new who and what our starters where capable of, so why take a chance on injury.

the approach is determined by the experience and skill of the assumed starters.

[Yoop]

You can say "it's too early to judge" and also say "in the limited snaps Jordan received, his reads were correct and his accuracy was good for the exception of one throw"

seems thats what he did say

[YoHoChecko]

You can say "it's too early to judge" and also say "in the limited snaps Jordan received, his reads were correct and his accuracy was good for the exception of one throw"

I love it when I'm gearing up my fingers for a lengthy reply and someone else responds making my point clearly, quickly, and succinctly instead.

Anyway....


Dan Orlovsky literally on ESPN as I'm typing, though: "Super impressive. Every play the ball went to the right place." Dominique Foxworth: I think the Packers should come a way feeling really good about Love's understanding of the game." (emphasis not added, contained in the quote).

I am advocating that it's too early to know what we have just as strongly as anyone here, btw. But you can prove capabilities and you cannot disprove capabilities.

What Jordan Love has shown, though, is that he is consistently hitting the development targets in terms of comprehension and understanding of his offense, the defensive looks, and where to go with the ball. His college scouting report listed decision-making as one of his biggest weaknesses. This is a change that has developed and is apparent.

So when I see Jordan show capabilities, I am encouraged and lock that in. Ok, he's capable of this. Does that mean he'll apply that capability consistently? Does it mean he will retain that composure and cognitive mastery when he's pressured off schedule? We don't know. Continuing evaluation. Seeing it on film in a small sample size doesn't tell you everything, but it tells you what's possible.

When Love shows that he ISN'T doing things we want to see from him--ball placement, hitting "the layups" at a very high rate, etc.--we can't, logically, conclude that he CAN'T do those things. It's just sound logic. Seeing something is evidence that it is possible. Not seeing something--at this early stage and small sample size--is a lack of evidence; not evidence that it will never be possible.

So yeah, we need a LOT more time to evaluate negatives to learn if they are growing pains or slowly developing, or if they are things he simply can't do. We need to see a LOT more to understand if he has an "it" factor when it's important (he's really never played an important snap of football). We don't have the body of evidence to know if his demonstrated capabilities are consistent and generalizable. And we don't know if what he has demonstrated to date is a closer representation of his floor or of his ceiling as a player.

ALL I'm saying is that his ability to choose the correct receiver and manage and execute the offense has been demonstrated enough to set a floor. For the first time, I'm developing a floor on what Jordan Love is. His floor is now game manager. Before his floor was washout bust. I welcome the update.

[Yoop]

I saw only one questionable decision, he had Reed crossing open for a first down and he Aaron Rodger'd it deep to Watson, and only a exceptional play from the safety stopped a almost certain TD, imo the deep throw to Watson was a called play, and he stuck with it, hardly blame him for that

I thought he looked a bit tight on the first series, had a couple throws he might like to redo, but over all had a very good outing.

same with Clifford, couple of picks that are good training vids that he'll learn from, but other wise cool as a cucumber, and fit the ball into tight coverage a few times, he'll be a good backup.