Waldo wrote: ↑03 May 2021 19:39
YoHoChecko wrote: ↑03 May 2021 19:28
He has no real options aside from showing up to the team and then intentionally sabotaging games with poor play.
Which, one can convincingly argue, he has done, and which was likely one of the reasons GB was seriously looking at QB's.
I've never bought that narrative at all. It's an apologist's narrative. It's for someone who believes that the only way Rodgers can fail is if he means to do it. It's just not true. Rodgers' failures were very apparent and natural progressions of NFL QB life.
He was a top-notch escape artist with great athleticism and ability to extend plays early in his career and then he stopped being able to escape. It's the same reason why "running" QBs often have the highest sack numbers. Because they THINK they can get away. Rodgers thought he could get away and his age and loss of elite mobility failed him. He took a while to adjust to extend plays less often. He was never a big "check-down" guy, and he didn't want to become one.
And then, of course, in a system that relied on winning one-on-ones, having declining receiver talent really did hurt at the end of the McCarthy years. I don't consider it a "failure" by anyone in personnel, more so just McCarthy's failure to adapt to his personnel. Because the team had Jordy and Cobb and Adams and the wheels fell of two of those guys a lot faster than I think we expected.
The one thing that was weird was that McCarthy totally bought into this "big play" theory of offense later in his tenure. He got "into analytics" but drew some pretty faulty conclusions with some causation/correlation confusion. And Rodgers seemed to go all in on that--in interviews and on the field. THAT I could see being some sort of schematic trolling. Like, ok, my coach says he wants big plays, I'll hold the ball and try to make big plays. Let's see how dumb that's going to be. But he kept doing it. That's the one thing that I always found a bit suspicious. Like, is Rodgers really being a good soldier? Is this how he wants to play? Does he really believe this flawed mentality? Seemed a bit unlikley.
But even that is still playing the way your coach is coaching you. Not "sabotaging" play.
I also take a bit of issue with the second part, about the team "looking seriously at QB." It IS true they did their diligence on the class that year, but by all accounts the team wanted a WR in round one and could not trade up for one. That was reported, stated, and fits well with the reality in which the teams that did trade up traded up from closer than we were, and the run really did happen.
Again, I would NOT have traded up for Love. I
might have taken him if he was still there at 30. But I never had questions about how that happened. It seemed to make a general amount of sense.
So Rodgers wasn't playing very well, and either he was sabotaging his coach, which is abhorrent, or he just was having trouble adjusting his game to his diminished athletic ability (escapability) in the pocket and his coach's failure to adapt his scheme to diminished WR talent. But the flaws in Rodgers' game were still flaws. They were still easy to see. They didn't seem to be something intentional you could fake. I doubt "getting hit a whole lot more than I used to" was his master strategy. He just didn't perform as well without more ideal circumstances.
Now he has a good scheme and some slightly better talent (Adams' development, MVS and Lazard being 3rd year versions of themselves not rookie versions of themselves, Tonyan, Aaron Jones). And the dividends are paying off. And a BIG part of that is forcing him to get the ball out faster, take fewer sacks, and finally adjust his game to this stage of his career. He wasn't doing it on his own. He needed someone to make him.