Packers Huddle

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

25 Oct 2022 13:26

NCF wrote: ↑

25 Oct 2022 11:38

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

25 Oct 2022 10:25

Read through this. Crazy. 11 personnel on 70% of plays. Only 4 motion plays and 5 play actions. We simply refuse to play to our strengths.

Hmmm... who do we know that prefers to live and die by this? This is where I don't care if he has 15 MVP's. This is just insanity. Pure stupidity to play this way.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/boxscore/_/gameId/401326461

34 passes to 20 carries to the backs.

I hate myself for even asking, but I suppose you have some kind of semblance of point here. What might that be?

NCF wrote: ↑

25 Oct 2022 15:22

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

25 Oct 2022 13:26

NCF wrote: ↑

25 Oct 2022 11:38

Hmmm... who do we know that prefers to live and die by this? This is where I don't care if he has 15 MVP's. This is just insanity. Pure stupidity to play this way.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/boxscore/_/gameId/401326461

34 passes to 20 carries to the backs.

I hate myself for even asking, but I suppose you have some kind of semblance of point here. What might that be?

Doesnt matter who is at QB. We still arent going to hand the ball off or get it to Jones.

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

25 Oct 2022 15:37

NCF wrote: ↑

25 Oct 2022 15:22

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

25 Oct 2022 13:26

https://www.espn.com/nfl/boxscore/_/gameId/401326461

34 passes to 20 carries to the backs.

I hate myself for even asking, but I suppose you have some kind of semblance of point here. What might that be?

Doesnt matter who is at QB. We still arent going to hand the ball off or get it to Jones.

That’s not my issue. It’s living in 11 personnel when you and I damn well know Matt LaFleur doesn’t want to.

NCF wrote: ↑

25 Oct 2022 16:42

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

25 Oct 2022 15:37

NCF wrote: ↑

25 Oct 2022 15:22

I hate myself for even asking, but I suppose you have some kind of semblance of point here. What might that be?

Doesnt matter who is at QB. We still arent going to hand the ball off or get it to Jones.

That’s not my issue. It’s living in 11 personnel when you and I damn well know Matt LaFleur doesn’t want to.

No one knows that. How often have we run 11 personnel over the last 3 years? How often do teams run 11 personnel when they are backed up in yards or in non short 3rd down situations? Let's just lose all logic and blame the best QB of all time. Easy

4 yard run, 2 yard run, incomplete to Lazard, punt
Holding penalty -10 yards, 7 yard run, incomplete to Doubs, 7 yard pass, punt
- 6 yard run, holding penalty -10 yards, incomplete tonyan, incomplete jones, punt
holding penalty -10 yards, 8 yard pass, incomplete pass watkins, incomplete doubs, formation penalty - 5 yards, punt
4 yard pass, 4 yard run, incomplete to doubs, punt
incomplete watkins, 0 yard run, 9 yard pass, incomplete doubs

You have a better chance at getting 5 yards on a pass than a run.

The problem is not passing, the problem is our receivers are terrible and our line is bad. It is obviousssssssssssss and people said this before the start of the season.

LombardiTime wrote: ↑

25 Oct 2022 09:40

paco wrote: ↑

24 Oct 2022 14:13

I agree that a greater commitment to the run, like Tennessee's commitment to Henry, would benefit the Packers.

But the tweet above is must more Buckowski hogwash.

Tannehill threw for 132 yards and the Titans offense scored 12 points on Sunday, but they won.

Rodgers threw for 194 yards and the Packers offense scored 14 points on Sunday, but they lost.

The Titans are going nowhere other than possibly winning the awful AFC South this season with that group of receivers, just like GB is going nowhere with its pass catchers.

Winning is the only stat that matters. We aren't doing that. That ain't hogwash.

Bukkaski sucks

Drj820 wrote: ↑

25 Oct 2022 17:40

Bukkaski sucks

another blogger who doesn't give two hoots about the circumstances, laying blame on Rodgers sells more ink because to most fans the QB is the most obvious problem when things don't go right.

Yoop wrote: ↑

25 Oct 2022 19:32

Drj820 wrote: ↑

25 Oct 2022 17:40

Bukkaski sucks

another blogger who doesn't give two hoots about the circumstances, laying blame on Rodgers sells more ink because to most fans the QB is the most obvious problem when things don't go right.

Bukkakeski doesn’t even hate rodgers for his play. He hates him because of his vax stance.

Drj820 wrote: ↑

25 Oct 2022 21:36

Yoop wrote: ↑

25 Oct 2022 19:32

Drj820 wrote: ↑

25 Oct 2022 17:40

Bukkaski sucks

another blogger who doesn't give two hoots about the circumstances, laying blame on Rodgers sells more ink because to most fans the QB is the most obvious problem when things don't go right.

Bukkakeski doesn’t even hate rodgers for his play. He hates him because of his vax stance.

me too, but that doesn't make me blind, I can see confusion and frustration, and the near complete lack of chemistry between Rodgers and most of these receivers, People here are spouting insane stuff, like Tonyan and Lazard have played well, Lazard gets the ball almost every time he's open, and has a drop in every game, Tonyan looks like he's running with lead weights, and Jones draws attention like &%$@ draws flies, but those issues shouldn't matter, it's Rodgers fault for not over coming that crap.

people are so quick to kick Rodgers to the curb, whats there plan for the future? oh ya, run and play stingy defense, as though that has a track record of consistent success, it took 20 years to replace Bart Starr, Packer fans may have a rude awakening, specially the younger fans who have only known success.

I don't like the present Aaron Rodgers much at all, I thought lying about the vax and his reasons for not getting poked where made up BS, so me and Bukkakeski see eye to eye about that much if nothing else.

bud fox wrote: ↑

25 Oct 2022 16:52

NCF wrote: ↑

25 Oct 2022 16:42

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

25 Oct 2022 15:37

Doesnt matter who is at QB. We still arent going to hand the ball off or get it to Jones.

That’s not my issue. It’s living in 11 personnel when you and I damn well know Matt LaFleur doesn’t want to.

No one knows that. How often have we run 11 personnel over the last 3 years? How often do teams run 11 personnel when they are backed up in yards or in non short 3rd down situations? Let's just lose all logic and blame the best QB of all time. Easy

4 yard run, 2 yard run, incomplete to Lazard, punt
Holding penalty -10 yards, 7 yard run, incomplete to Doubs, 7 yard pass, punt
- 6 yard run, holding penalty -10 yards, incomplete tonyan, incomplete jones, punt
holding penalty -10 yards, 8 yard pass, incomplete pass watkins, incomplete doubs, formation penalty - 5 yards, punt
4 yard pass, 4 yard run, incomplete to doubs, punt
incomplete watkins, 0 yard run, 9 yard pass, incomplete doubs

You have a better chance at getting 5 yards on a pass than a run.

The problem is not passing, the problem is our receivers are terrible and our line is bad. It is obviousssssssssssss and people said this before the start of the season.

Again, not commenting on the run/pass ratio. I am talking about playing a high percentage of 11 personnel when we don't have the WR's to win in it. Motion, play action, and offensive creativity even with something as simple as different formations and personnel groupings are all tools to help the WR group. Look back to the games before this season when Davante wasn't available. They didn't come out in 11 personnel and demand our guys beat their guys. I don't know how anyone can defend this. If we were happy with this offensive approach, Mike McCarthy would still be our coach.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

25 Oct 2022 23:34

So picks in the 1st, 2nd and 3rd,

Picks in the 4th and 5th.

One knock on Gute has been later rounds, so that we have been getting real quality snaps so early on from our 3 4th and 5th rounders is promising for this draft class.

Yoop wrote: ↑

25 Oct 2022 22:08

people are so quick to kick Rodgers to the curb, whats there plan for the future? oh ya, run and play stingy defense, as though that has a track record of consistent success, it took 20 years to replace Bart Starr, Packer fans may have a rude awakening, specially the younger fans who have only known success.

This is such a trite take from Boomer fans, as if Rodgers will play forever with 0 drop-off in quality if we don't get rid of him.

There's no avoiding that we will need a new QB again not long from now, that the replacement process may not work out and we could find ourselves on a QB carousel. It's an entirely moot point, no amount of holding onto Rodgers changes this reality. Father Time is undefeated.

If anything, holding onto him this long may have made our Life After Aaron prospects WORSE due to the cap hell his massive contract may have saddled us with.

(**edit**)

Also, Rodgers himself is playing like &%$@ ... so what difference does it make?

Not to mention, look around the league right now. Mediocre QB play is very widespread right now, some teams have winning records with it (e.g. NYG and NYJ, both of which beat our "great" QB with their mediocrity).

Teams that are paying top dollar for older QBs like us, Bucs, Broncos, and Rams aren't clearly advantaged, in fact they have worse records than teams like NYG and NYG run by Mid quarterbacks.

The era of QB dominance is over. We are past the point of having 10-15 really good QBs playing at a time. Now it's like 5 (and Rodgers is not one of them).


I, for one, am ready for some L O V E in my life.

Wish he would get better at holding the edge. Learning some bad habits like Z Smith and Matthews before him.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

26 Oct 2022 09:05

Wish he would get better at holding the edge. Learning some bad habits like Z Smith and Matthews before him.

I wish his teammates wouldn't hold when Gary gets potential drive killing sacks.

This is an interesting one. Not sure I would put Rasul in the top 5 coverage corners this season.

Labrev wrote: ↑

26 Oct 2022 08:37

Not to mention, look around the league right now. Mediocre QB play is very widespread right now, some teams have winning records with it (e.g. NYG and NYJ, both of which beat our "great" QB with their mediocrity).

Teams that are paying top dollar for older QBs like us, Bucs, Broncos, and Rams aren't clearly advantaged, in fact they have worse records than teams like NYG and NYG run by Mid quarterbacks.

The era of QB dominance is over. We are past the point of having 10-15 really good QBs playing at a time. Now it's like 5 (and Rodgers is not one of them).


I, for one, am ready for some L O V E in my life.

I havn't looked but I didn't notice to many dropped passes from any of those QB's you think are just mediocre, funny how receivers that catch passes can make a QB look good.

the reason the FO gave Rodgers the big money to retain him has a lot to do with team building, they gambled that a stcked talent defense, a good running game and his thought of ability to make average receivers good enough would get us to the promised land, problem is, this has been a very inconsistent WR group, and Rodgers (minus practice and PS games) has not been able to build chemistry with most of em, thats what I see, add in all the dropped passes, penalty's and we can't sustain drives, the goal obviously from the FO is to compete for a SB during the length of the contract, Rodgers is the only one to hint that it might be shorter, the FO seems commited to the length of the deal, so his time isn't over.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

26 Oct 2022 09:37

This is an interesting one. Not sure I would put Rasul in the top 5 coverage corners this season.

Chit man, someone else drafted our best CB

with all the zone confusion I'am surprised any of our 3 made the top 10, let alone top 5.