Rodgers future

[TheSkeptic]

Unfortunately Rodgers first read is doubled 90% of the time and not open like you mentioned with Brady. Imagine Rodgers with an open primary read

Possible that Brady's first read was open because it wasn't the same one every play?

Yeah which is the coach's problem. Play concept.

If the coach called it, then sure it was his problem. But if Rodgers checked out of it into the same routine play, then it is Rodgers' problem. We have no idea how often he ignores the called play and does what he wants. We do know, however, that not a lot has changed since MM was calling the plays. Rodgers still throws deep and misses on 3rd and 4 and the Packers punt.

[TheSkeptic]

When I say an uptempo offense I don't mean getting the ball out quickly. I mean getting the play off quickly. Seems to me MLF changes personnel after every snap and Rodgers will wait until 1 or 2 seconds on the clock to snap it. When our offense gets "out of rhythm" as like they say I would like to see us go no-huddle just to change things up and try something different. We didn't change anything against SF. Patriots always changed things up. I thinkwe don't because this is the way Aaron prefers it but maybe I'm wrong.

Yeah but at the same time he was the best player in the league this year.

Shouldn't it be enough being better than everyone else?

The best player in the league? When it mattered, he played the same kind of game as Love. Both scored 1 TD. Both set up 2 field goals. Vs the Chiefs, the Packers missed both FG's and vs the 49'ers they made 1 of 2. That was the difference in the score. In both games, ST lost the game and in both games the O was not good enough to win in spite of horrible play by ST.

BUT, Love moved the ball, frequently starting inside his own 20, once inside the 2. Rodgers had normal field position. The Packers O had 301 yards with Love vs 263 with Rodgers. Love threw an interception but Rodgers fumbled the ball. Both opponents were good teams with very good D's. But Love had a road game in a difficult stadium, Love had a vastly inferior Oline and Rodgers had the best home field advantage in the league.

Love's O outplayed Rodgers' O. No, Rodgers is not the best player in the league last season. He is no better than Love when it matters, against a quality opponent.

[packman114]

When I say an uptempo offense I don't mean getting the ball out quickly. I mean getting the play off quickly. Seems to me MLF changes personnel after every snap and Rodgers will wait until 1 or 2 seconds on the clock to snap it. When our offense gets "out of rhythm" as like they say I would like to see us go no-huddle just to change things up and try something different. We didn't change anything against SF. Patriots always changed things up. I thinkwe don't because this is the way Aaron prefers it but maybe I'm wrong.

theres been a lot of discussion on running the game clock down to next to nothing prior to the snap, and right from Lafluer this is a concentrated plan, it all comes into play, long time consuming drives turn TOP in your favor when you have a lead, plus it gives Rodgers time to read the defense, and as we know DL man become impatient and jump off sides, all things considered it's a plus.

people for whatever reason seem to think we have this great stable of WR's, or that Rodgers wont throw to anyone but Devonte, when actually Rodgers would gladly spread the ball around, which he does against weaker coverage, all one has to do is look at game stats, he often throws to 6 or 7 different receivers, however against great coverage defenses Devonte is often the only guy that clears in under a 3 count.

sometimes it looks like we refuse to adjust mid game, imo I think it might have to do with a lack of available player that would fit what we could adjust to, if ya don't have a player that can succeed with jet sweeps for example it's a waste to even try, the goal is to use high % plays as much as possible, contingent of course on player availability, and our receiver core is thin due to injury and also a general lack of talent, sure Rodgers misses the open guy at times, but can you imagine what a average QB would be able to do?

I have a problem with doing the same thing over and over. We had 6 three & outs. At some point a coach in a single elimination game has got to say let's do something different or unpredictable. The teams with Brady would go no-huddle or try a WR Option pass trick play to change momentum. We did none of that. I think part of it is MLF liking to change up personnel every play and part of it is we have "Aaron freaking Rodgers" and he will make a play for us. Rodgers used to love running the no-huddle but MLF apparently doesn't like it. Just like basketball, if your half court offense can't get a shot off, you go full-court press to change the speed of the game.

I prefer coaches that try ANYTHING to win. Not just trying to do what we always do. MLF is like MM in that regard, although MM did try some stuff early in his career like onside kicks after halftime and fake FGs or punts.

[Drj820]

two years in a row the lights have simply gotten too bright for Lacoach in January.

[Yoop]

two years in a row the lights have simply gotten too bright for Lacoach in January.

OK, but Rodgers should have been able to do enough to score more then 13 points, again if ya don't have the horses ya can't pull the cart, Dillon getting hurt was huge, Jones did well, but against a brick wall ya need a battering ram like Dillon, plus Cobb was a no show along with MVS, along with DEquara and Lewis, it's easy to think as I said that Rodgers didn't do well, but he had plenty of company, sure Maybe Matt could have schemed those guys or others to be more involved and affective but ya have to give credit to the niner defense as well.

[Drj820]

two years in a row the lights have simply gotten too bright for Lacoach in January.

OK, but Rodgers should have been able to do enough to score more then 13 points, again if ya don't have the horses ya can't pull the cart, Dillon getting hurt was huge, Jones did well, but against a brick wall ya need a battering ram like Dillon, plus Cobb was a no show along with MVS, along with DEquara and Lewis, it's easy to think as I said that Rodgers didn't do well, but he had plenty of company, sure Maybe Matt could have schemed those guys or others to be more involved and affective but ya have to give credit to the niner defense as well.

so we make excuses for Lacoach but not Rodgers?

Lacoach is the offensive guru (allegedly) and Rodgers is a player he coaches and is responsible for, and the gurus offense has come up small twice in a row in January.

[Yoop]

two years in a row the lights have simply gotten too bright for Lacoach in January.

OK, but Rodgers should have been able to do enough to score more then 13 points, again if ya don't have the horses ya can't pull the cart, Dillon getting hurt was huge, Jones did well, but against a brick wall ya need a battering ram like Dillon, plus Cobb was a no show along with MVS, along with DEquara and Lewis, it's easy to think as I said that Rodgers didn't do well, but he had plenty of company, sure Maybe Matt could have schemed those guys or others to be more involved and affective but ya have to give credit to the niner defense as well.

so we make excuses for Lacoach but not Rodgers?

Lacoach is the offensive guru (allegedly) and Rodgers is a player he coaches and is responsible for, and the gurus offense has come up small twice in a row in January.

OK, but Lacoach can't just go kick King out and defend Miller himself, or catch the passes Adams or others drop, he can't take the ball away from Aaron who missed a wide open Lazard, what he might have done is condone the drafting of Amari Rodgers and for that he should be flogged a quality slot receiver might have gotten Rodgers attention, but who knows since he wouldn't look elsewhere most of the game with Adams.

[Crazylegs Starks]

so we make excuses for Lacoach but not Rodgers?

Lacoach is the offensive guru (allegedly) and Rodgers is a player he coaches and is responsible for, and the gurus offense has come up small twice in a row in January.

It's a lot easier to make excuses for LaCoach when we look back at the film and see his plays resulting in open guys! Having said that, I am still disappointed that the motion concepts sometimes disappear for whole games at a time. And of course we have all complained when we feel they should be running the ball more.

[Pckfn23]

so we make excuses for Lacoach but not Rodgers?

Lacoach is the offensive guru (allegedly) and Rodgers is a player he coaches and is responsible for, and the gurus offense has come up small twice in a row in January.

It's a lot easier to make excuses for LaCoach when we look back at the film and see his plays resulting in open guys! Having said that, I am still disappointed that the motion concepts sometimes disappear for whole games at a time. And of course we have all complained when we feel they should be running the ball more.

I am also disappointed in the Oline configuration, ESPECIALLY not changing it up at half.

[Crazylegs Starks]

so we make excuses for Lacoach but not Rodgers?

Lacoach is the offensive guru (allegedly) and Rodgers is a player he coaches and is responsible for, and the gurus offense has come up small twice in a row in January.

It's a lot easier to make excuses for LaCoach when we look back at the film and see his plays resulting in open guys! Having said that, I am still disappointed that the motion concepts sometimes disappear for whole games at a time. And of course we have all complained when we feel they should be running the ball more.

I am also disappointed in the Oline configuration, ESPECIALLY not changing it up at half.

Yes! I got a bad feeling when the OL lineup was announced before the game.

[BF004]

[texas]

[salmar80]

My sources told me Aaron wants become a spokesman for Tesla and Apple, and the Chargers are a natural collab for both. I also heard he has a hard time with geography, so he appreciates how it's real hard to misplace the Houston Texans. He loves "bears" as a Wordle opener, tho "lions" aren't far behind, but "bills" and "colts" just suck, so they're out. As a critical thinker, the Saints are an option, since AR appreciates the irony of utilizing the title for exceptionally holy people, many of whom suffered or died for their faith, to make a crapton of money out of men playing a silly game of hitting each other while carrying a pigskin.

[RingoCStarrQB]

Is this a serious statement? I don't think it is a serious statement, but...

To slightly take the edge off ..... this line of thinking should NOT be swept under the rug….

To be fair to you, I didn’t sweep this thought under the rug. I immediately threw it in the trash and dumped it outside. That’s where the idea of clearing out the front office and coaching staff following the disappointing loss last week rates. It’s asinine. It’s knee jerk, emotional ranting. It’s what loser teams like Miami, Jacksonville and Houston do.

I’m still not convinced you’re not just trolling for a reaction. For your sake, I hope you are.

Excerpted and Paraphrased from: https://expectingexcellence.net/leaders ... eaching-5/

Complacency-The Poison of Excellence

When addressing his players, Vince Lombardi, the legendary Hall of Fame Football Coach of the Green Bay Packers once said, “Gentlemen, we will chase perfection, and we will chase it relentlessly, knowing all the while we can never attain it. But along the way, we shall catch excellence.”

Excellence is a destination. A destination that we must continually pursue.

You know a culture of excellence when you see it!

Thriving in a culture of excellence requires thought, organization, and intense preparation. Once again, pulling from my coaching background, one must continually prepare to compete. This competition is very personal and can best be summarized in the concept that with every activity one does, that activity is designed to make you better. You will be better today than you were yesterday. There are no shortcuts. The pursuit of excellence will be quickly derailed when one decides to take shortcuts. Shortcuts ensure that everyone gets shortchanged!

......... Nick Saban stated, and I paraphrase, that complacency is the biggest obstacle to excellence. To me, this statement is true. It applies to the classroom, school building, district, corporate office, or athletic field.

A recent article in Forbes can help serve as a guide and resource for leaders. The article discusses signs that employees are becoming complacent. The signs of complacency are listed below:

Disengaged-Is your staff focused?
Stop Thinking-Has your staff stopped asking questions and challenging themselves?
Stop Taking Initiative-Has your staff stopped taking leadership roles on initiatives? Are they disconnected to others?
Don’t Invest in Themselves-Has you staff stopped caring about personal achievement?
Taking Shortcuts-Has your staff stopped paying attention to detail?
Do Not Take Risks-Is your staff afraid to take any sort of educational risk?
Lost Their Passion-Has your staff lost their personal enthusiasm and excitement for their jobs?
Not Managing Personal Brand-Has your staff forgotten what is important to each person?
Disgruntled with Career Path- Is your staff unhappy with the way their career has worked out?
Lost Any Hope for a Brighter Future- Has your staff given up? The challenge now becomes how one can re-claim this person. They must somehow be mentored and guided to re-start their career. A distinct challenge to your leadership skills.

Today’s message was about complacency. .......... Before long, especially in an unhealthy culture, you could become satisfactory, average or mediocre and you might be comfortable with that. Great teachers, great principals, and great leaders never accept mediocrity and have a way of combating this plague and overcoming it. This cancer must be sent into remission. You must persevere and maintain your journey to excellence. It is hard work ...........

[salmar80]

To slightly take the edge off ..... this line of thinking should NOT be swept under the rug….

To be fair to you, I didn’t sweep this thought under the rug. I immediately threw it in the trash and dumped it outside. That’s where the idea of clearing out the front office and coaching staff following the disappointing loss last week rates. It’s asinine. It’s knee jerk, emotional ranting. It’s what loser teams like Miami, Jacksonville and Houston do.

I’m still not convinced you’re not just trolling for a reaction. For your sake, I hope you are.

Excerpted and Paraphrased from: https://expectingexcellence.net/leaders ... eaching-5/

Complacency-The Poison of Excellence

When addressing his players, Vince Lombardi, the legendary Hall of Fame Football Coach of the Green Bay Packers once said, “Gentlemen, we will chase perfection, and we will chase it relentlessly, knowing all the while we can never attain it. But along the way, we shall catch excellence.”

Excellence is a destination. A destination that we must continually pursue.

You know a culture of excellence when you see it!

Thriving in a culture of excellence requires thought, organization, and intense preparation. Once again, pulling from my coaching background, one must continually prepare to compete. This competition is very personal and can best be summarized in the concept that with every activity one does, that activity is designed to make you better. You will be better today than you were yesterday. There are no shortcuts. The pursuit of excellence will be quickly derailed when one decides to take shortcuts. Shortcuts ensure that everyone gets shortchanged!

......... Nick Saban stated, and I paraphrase, that complacency is the biggest obstacle to excellence. To me, this statement is true. It applies to the classroom, school building, district, corporate office, or athletic field.

A recent article in Forbes can help serve as a guide and resource for leaders. The article discusses signs that employees are becoming complacent. The signs of complacency are listed below:

Disengaged-Is your staff focused?
Stop Thinking-Has your staff stopped asking questions and challenging themselves?
Stop Taking Initiative-Has your staff stopped taking leadership roles on initiatives? Are they disconnected to others?
Don’t Invest in Themselves-Has you staff stopped caring about personal achievement?
Taking Shortcuts-Has your staff stopped paying attention to detail?
Do Not Take Risks-Is your staff afraid to take any sort of educational risk?
Lost Their Passion-Has your staff lost their personal enthusiasm and excitement for their jobs?
Not Managing Personal Brand-Has your staff forgotten what is important to each person?
Disgruntled with Career Path- Is your staff unhappy with the way their career has worked out?
Lost Any Hope for a Brighter Future- Has your staff given up? The challenge now becomes how one can re-claim this person. They must somehow be mentored and guided to re-start their career. A distinct challenge to your leadership skills.

Today’s message was about complacency. .......... Before long, especially in an unhealthy culture, you could become satisfactory, average or mediocre and you might be comfortable with that. Great teachers, great principals, and great leaders never accept mediocrity and have a way of combating this plague and overcoming it. This cancer must be sent into remission. You must persevere and maintain your journey to excellence. It is hard work ...........

Yeah, let's listen to the great Nick Saban. He certainly knows about competence in the NFL. He only lasted 2 years as a HC, exited with a losing record.

There are 5 head coaches in NFL history with better regular season win-loss record than Vince Lombardi. We totally should fire one of them because he didn't manage to win a SB in his first three years. That certainly would prevent "complacency - the poison of excellence"!

It would, however invite idiocy - the poison of competence, champion of suckage.

Let me spell this out for you: WINNING SUPER BOWLS IS $%@# HARD THESE DAYS! In a mature league with 32 teams and salary cap, there will never be a long term coach or a franchise that would have a chance at winning one every 3 years. That expectation is ludicrous.

Bill B had a 9-year stretch without one. Ya think he shoulda been fired for complacency? Oh, he then went on to win 3 in 5 years.

Sarcasm aside, I would change my mind about LaFleur IF his O showed signs of staleness. MM's offenses reeked of that in his latter years with us. I think MM was just borderline burned out and unable to innovate anymore. But LaFleur's scheme has been very adaptive to the talent at hand. Far from stale.

Has he been complacent with his assistants? He has now fired and replaced one DC and two ST coordinators. I see no complacency, actully moving on very quickly. Too bad the ST hires have been bad. On the other hand, he has hired and groomed assistants that of such quality that they are being poached left and right.

[Pckfn23]

[dsr]

Yeah which is the coach's problem. Play concept.

Are we talking about the first read of the called play or the first read of the QB?

I am talking about the primary option of the play. MLF said 90% of all play concepts are based on Adams being the primary option. THe intention of the play is to get the ball to Adams if he is the primary option. That may change with a pre snap audible and then post snap if Adams is covered. If the intention of the play is for short yardage to the flat or a slant or something to Cobb than that would be play design.

It is strange that people try to make out that the best player in the league right now and one of the best all time is the problem. The off did enough to win the game - special teams cost us the game.

If we accept that the offence did enough to win the game, then the obvious next question is why are we paying $40m for a quarterback when we only need 13 points? Surely we could find a good rookie (or Love, of course) who can so that on a regular basis, and we can spend the change on other good players?

[bud fox]

Are we talking about the first read of the called play or the first read of the QB?

I am talking about the primary option of the play. MLF said 90% of all play concepts are based on Adams being the primary option. THe intention of the play is to get the ball to Adams if he is the primary option. That may change with a pre snap audible and then post snap if Adams is covered. If the intention of the play is for short yardage to the flat or a slant or something to Cobb than that would be play design.

It is strange that people try to make out that the best player in the league right now and one of the best all time is the problem. The off did enough to win the game - special teams cost us the game.

If we accept that the offence did enough to win the game, then the obvious next question is why are we paying $40m for a quarterback when we only need 13 points? Surely we could find a good rookie (or Love, of course) who can so that on a regular basis, and we can spend the change on other good players?

Come on man ... did the Packers average 13 points a game? The offense has to score more points than the opposing offense

[dsr]

Come on man ... did the Packers average 13 points a game? The offense has to score more points than the opposing offense

In the playoffs, yes. The Packers offence, in 2021 season playoff games, got us into position to average exactly 13 points per game. And the Packers, as a team averaged the lowest of the 14 competing teams in the play-offs.

"They did enough to win the game" can only mean one of two things. Either we won the game, or else we scored so many points that we should have won the game given competence in the rest of the team. You can argue that the defence did enough to win the game, fair enough, because a competent offence and special teams would have won easily. But to argue that the offence did enough because 14 points would have won it, is as futile as arguing that special teams did enough because 14 points would have won it. Special teams were historically bad, but the offence had the easiest of tasks (as easy as play-offs can possibly be) and they did not do enough to win it.

[bud fox]

Come on man ... did the Packers average 13 points a game? The offense has to score more points than the opposing offense

In the playoffs, yes. The Packers offence, in 2021 season playoff games, got us into position to average exactly 13 points per game. And the Packers, as a team averaged the lowest of the 14 competing teams in the play-offs.

"They did enough to win the game" can only mean one of two things. Either we won the game, or else we scored so many points that we should have won the game given competence in the rest of the team. You can argue that the defence did enough to win the game, fair enough, because a competent offence and special teams would have won easily. But to argue that the offence did enough because 14 points would have won it, is as futile as arguing that special teams did enough because 14 points would have won it. Special teams were historically bad, but the offence had the easiest of tasks (as easy as play-offs can possibly be) and they did not do enough to win it.

Just no logic to what you are saying.

The Packers off scored 10 points. The 49ers off scored 6 points.

The Packers averaged 26 points a game this season.

The 49ers averaged 25 points a game per season.

If we remove special teams, the Packers win. That means the offense did enough but special teams did not.

Why did the 49ers off do so much worse than their season average?