Packers Huddle

AmishMafia wrote: ↑

28 Oct 2022 18:16

texas wrote: ↑

28 Oct 2022 17:02

It sucks when we see these screenshots after big losses where there is a wide open WR on a key play that goes poorly (2007 NFCCG Favre OT INT comes to mind), but how many of these "missed plays" with "wide open WRs" can be reasonably expected to have been performed better in the moment, given our gameplans at the time and the relative risks of not going with earlier reads?

It also sucks to see an all-time great player's skill erode. It's sad to see him blame everyone around him and not take any accountability. It's also sad to see his and see his ardent fans oblivious to what should be obvious. The same folks who have been saying for years that AR makes everyone around him better now say he is surrounded by a lack of talent.

RingoCStarrQB wrote: ↑

29 Oct 2022 07:23

AmishMafia wrote: ↑

28 Oct 2022 18:16

texas wrote: ↑

28 Oct 2022 17:02

It sucks when we see these screenshots after big losses where there is a wide open WR on a key play that goes poorly (2007 NFCCG Favre OT INT comes to mind), but how many of these "missed plays" with "wide open WRs" can be reasonably expected to have been performed better in the moment, given our gameplans at the time and the relative risks of not going with earlier reads?

It also sucks to see an all-time great player's skill erode. It's sad to see him blame everyone around him and not take any accountability. It's also sad to see his and see his ardent fans oblivious to what should be obvious. The same folks who have been saying for years that AR makes everyone around him better now say he is surrounded by a lack of talent.

blah blah blah

Rodgers ardent supporters know he isn't the player he was 5 years ago, We also know that he was able to put balls where only Devonte Adams could catch them just a year ago, We also know the alternative to Rodgers is on the bench because thats where he belongs

Rodgers for years was able to maximize the potential of the receiver talent given him, why did the FO think that would last forever? at some point they had to know it was time to reverse this process and Rodgers would need the receivers to support him more, but every game this year we see twice the dropped passes, twice the mental mistakes.

Why is it people expect a 1st ballot HOF QB who has been the face of this franchise for so long, and is known to be a self centered diva to admit he's fallible? typically these types never do that, it's a crack to the armor that shields them, behind closed doors, to team mates, to the coaches he may admit he also needs to play better, but he wont admit that to the media or the fans.

Favre never did it either, neither did Montana, or Young, or Brady, etc etc. the Captain of a sinking battleship goes down never having admitted defeat, why do we expect Rodgers to?

was he right to chastise team mates in public? obviously whats been said in the locker room hasn't worked, so we'll see if Rodgers calling them out openly does, what ever it takes to do better is fine with me.

texas wrote: ↑

28 Oct 2022 17:02

Can someone explain why this isn't just some hindsight 20/20 nonsense? I.e. I am sure you can find better choices that could have been made on every play, after the fact, but 1) why are we to assume that the play wasn't run as called; 2) assuming it was run correctly, why should we assume it was a stupid or suboptimal play call decision; 3) assuming it was a correctly run play that was not suboptimal, why should Rodgers have thrown out the plan on that play and instead waited for a random different route to possibly open up in the future? Haven't we been wanting him to stop doing the sandbox stuff where he waits too long for someone to get open and then everything falls apart? Haven't we been wanting him to do more of these quick passes?

The point is that yeah, it would have been nice to hit Sammy Watkins in stride for a TD but why is it anybody's fault for not doing that when the point of the play might have been to do a quick pass because we were building to something or trying to compensate for other weaknesses such as the poor protection we've been getting?

It sucks when we see these screenshots after big losses where there is a wide open WR on a key play that goes poorly (2007 NFCCG Favre OT INT comes to mind), but how many of these "missed plays" with "wide open WRs" can be reasonably expected to have been performed better in the moment, given our gameplans at the time and the relative risks of not going with earlier reads?

That's the thing. We have no clue what play was called or what, if anything, AR changed before the snap after he saw what the defense was doing. I'm beginning to think most of this is an execution issue than anything else. If the line can't keep defenders at bay or open up holes for RBs, the QB is jittery and throws a bad pass and/or WRs don't recognize what is happening and/or drop passes this or any other offense will not function properly.

I frimly believe the offensive coaches were wrong in not insisting AR be in attendance for all of the offseason activities after this last draft. He and the young (and Watkins) WRs needed as much practice time with Rodgers as possible before the start of the season to get on the same page. They are now trying to do it on the fly and it shows.

I want to address the Texas post because it is starting to gain steam and once again "blame" is being placed elsewhere.

1. The offensive line did its job. Under no circumstance was Rodgers under any duress.

2. This play has been analyzed by a lot of smart people. We know the play. Amari does a little hook route towards the left center of the field (about 4 yards out), Doubs does a flat route toward the sideline and Watkins does a go route. This is a fantastic play because you have 3 WRs in a bunch all going three different ways that makes the defense choose which one to take away. Like the advantage is TOTALLY on the offense here because the offense knows the play. The defense does not. The offense knows that Watkins isn't going to block the CB...the defense does not. Like we have to remember this.

All Rodgers had to do was run the actual play. Under no circumstance is the play "throw immediately to Doubs". That is a stupid playcall because the play doesn't make sense to have that. If it was a throw immediately to Doubs, you wouldn't see 11 and 8 run routes. You would instead see them blocking.

No. This play was simply letting the QB analyze the defense and attack their weak spot. It was set up beautifully for the offense but instead it was executed very poorly.

This forum has no issue Monday-morning quarterbacking almost anything but then the meer notion that "we couldn't know what this play call is" when we actually know EXACTLY what this playcall is...is ridiculous.

This was a huge play in the game. The play call was there. The offensive line blocking was there. Everything lined up perfectly for this play to be at worst an easy first down or at best a TD. All that needed to happen was the right decision by the QB to attack the defensive weakspot. And the QB couldn't have done any worse on this particular play.

I wouldn’t write off Rodgers yet. We know he’s not great when his backs against the wall and facing adversity. He rolls his eyes and fails to lead. He’s just been put in a position that is counter to everything that he is. Give him some vet receivers who can read his mind in GB or elsewhere and he’d look like the Rodgers of old again in no time

Drj820 wrote: ↑

29 Oct 2022 11:20

I wouldn’t write off Rodgers yet. We know he’s not great when his backs against the wall and facing adversity. He rolls his eyes and fails to lead. He’s just been put in a position that is counter to everything that he is. Give him some vet receivers who can read his mind in GB or elsewhere and he’d look like the Rodgers of old again in no time

Johnny Constantine Unitas was washed up after Year 15. His last two seasons yielded losing records (Baltimore and San Diego). Imagine Rodgers put out to pasture on the west coast just like the great Johnny U was.

go pak go wrote: ↑

29 Oct 2022 11:12

I want to address the Texas post because it is starting to gain steam and once again "blame" is being placed elsewhere.

1. The offensive line did its job. Under no circumstance was Rodgers under any duress.

2. This play has been analyzed by a lot of smart people. We know the play. Amari does a little hook route towards the left center of the field (about 4 yards out), Doubs does a flat route toward the sideline and Watkins does a go route. This is a fantastic play because you have 3 WRs in a bunch all going three different ways that makes the defense choose which one to take away. Like the advantage is TOTALLY on the offense here because the offense knows the play. The defense does not. The offense knows that Watkins isn't going to block the CB...the defense does not. Like we have to remember this.

All Rodgers had to do was run the actual play. Under no circumstance is the play "throw immediately to Doubs". That is a stupid playcall because the play doesn't make sense to have that. If it was a throw immediately to Doubs, you wouldn't see 11 and 8 run routes. You would instead see them blocking.

No. This play was simply letting the QB analyze the defense and attack their weak spot. It was set up beautifully for the offense but instead it was executed very poorly.

This forum has no issue Monday-morning quarterbacking almost anything but then the meer notion that "we couldn't know what this play call is" when we actually know EXACTLY what this playcall is...is ridiculous.

This was a huge play in the game. The play call was there. The offensive line blocking was there. Everything lined up perfectly for this play to be at worst an easy first down or at best a TD. All that needed to happen was the right decision by the QB to attack the defensive weakspot. And the QB couldn't have done any worse on this particular play.

I'm in no way someone who defers to experts (in this case the coaches or players), so they (Rodgers or coaches) could have absolutely done something stupid, and we fans could absolutely know better. But my post was asking why we know all of these things.

Like yeah, it probably would make sense to have WRs block if we wanted to throw immediately to Doubs, but what's to say this wasn't one of those 20% plays where Watkins was supposed to block? What's to say that one of their defenders had some tendency that Rodgers knew about (from film study) that made Doubs the obvious choice here? There are a lot of what-ifs here.

I'm going to ask my friend on this one. Maybe you all are right.

Crazylegs Starks wrote: ↑

27 Oct 2022 12:30

If we really want to get Rodgers back to MVP form, we need to get Love to do something to !@#$ him off. Maybe Love could call him "old man", or insult his haircut, or put Icy Hot in his underwear!

This! I’ve been saying the only real problem with the Packers IS Rodgers’ haircut! Get rid of that haircut and the Pack starts winning!

;-)

Drj820 wrote: ↑

27 Oct 2022 21:14

I’m not sure rodgers has the ability to put himself in about man’s shoes. I don’t think he can pretend he’s a rookie receiver and do what the rookie would do. I don’t think he sees a guy and throws to where he is. I think he cerebrally knows where a guy should be…based on practice reps (he mentions that a lot), or what defender does (not something most rookies would pick up on), or where a man SHOULD be. Problem is that it’s just a fact that these guys aren’t always where they should be. So 12 should adjust his game and try to think like his noob receivers. Not sure he has ability to do that though.

This!

When we see so many teams play with backup and even third string QBs who get some positive results (especially this season), look at what they do. They coach changes to their offensive schemes that allow the backup QB to play more to their strengths. (Never a better example than in Seattle this year too.) The result is that the offenses have many positive outcomes. Not perfect and maybe not what those teams are used to, but still positive games and more wins than might be expected under the conditions.

Why does it seem that GB is not making changes like this to work more to the WR corps strengths and/or Rodger’s recent, um, limitations?

Scott4Pack wrote: ↑

29 Oct 2022 15:02

Drj820 wrote: ↑

27 Oct 2022 21:14

I’m not sure rodgers has the ability to put himself in about man’s shoes. I don’t think he can pretend he’s a rookie receiver and do what the rookie would do. I don’t think he sees a guy and throws to where he is. I think he cerebrally knows where a guy should be…based on practice reps (he mentions that a lot), or what defender does (not something most rookies would pick up on), or where a man SHOULD be. Problem is that it’s just a fact that these guys aren’t always where they should be. So 12 should adjust his game and try to think like his noob receivers. Not sure he has ability to do that though.

This!

When we see so many teams play with backup and even third string QBs who get some positive results (especially this season), look at what they do. They coach changes to their offensive schemes that allow the backup QB to play more to their strengths. (Never a better example than in Seattle this year too.) The result is that the offenses have many positive outcomes. Not perfect and maybe not what those teams are used to, but still positive games and more wins than might be expected under the conditions.

Why does it seem that GB is not making changes like this to work more to the WR corps strengths and/or Rodger’s recent, um, limitations?

You answered it. It's the haircut. No one respects the haircut.

texas wrote: ↑

29 Oct 2022 14:23

go pak go wrote: ↑

29 Oct 2022 11:12

I want to address the Texas post because it is starting to gain steam and once again "blame" is being placed elsewhere.

1. The offensive line did its job. Under no circumstance was Rodgers under any duress.

2. This play has been analyzed by a lot of smart people. We know the play. Amari does a little hook route towards the left center of the field (about 4 yards out), Doubs does a flat route toward the sideline and Watkins does a go route. This is a fantastic play because you have 3 WRs in a bunch all going three different ways that makes the defense choose which one to take away. Like the advantage is TOTALLY on the offense here because the offense knows the play. The defense does not. The offense knows that Watkins isn't going to block the CB...the defense does not. Like we have to remember this.

All Rodgers had to do was run the actual play. Under no circumstance is the play "throw immediately to Doubs". That is a stupid playcall because the play doesn't make sense to have that. If it was a throw immediately to Doubs, you wouldn't see 11 and 8 run routes. You would instead see them blocking.

No. This play was simply letting the QB analyze the defense and attack their weak spot. It was set up beautifully for the offense but instead it was executed very poorly.

This forum has no issue Monday-morning quarterbacking almost anything but then the meer notion that "we couldn't know what this play call is" when we actually know EXACTLY what this playcall is...is ridiculous.

This was a huge play in the game. The play call was there. The offensive line blocking was there. Everything lined up perfectly for this play to be at worst an easy first down or at best a TD. All that needed to happen was the right decision by the QB to attack the defensive weakspot. And the QB couldn't have done any worse on this particular play.

I'm in no way someone who defers to experts (in this case the coaches or players), so they (Rodgers or coaches) could have absolutely done something stupid, and we fans could absolutely know better. But my post was asking why we know all of these things.

Like yeah, it probably would make sense to have WRs block if we wanted to throw immediately to Doubs, but what's to say this wasn't one of those 20% plays where Watkins was supposed to block? What's to say that one of their defenders had some tendency that Rodgers knew about (from film study) that made Doubs the obvious choice here? There are a lot of what-ifs here.

I'm going to ask my friend on this one. Maybe you all are right.

He said Rodgers should have thrown to Watkins

He did say that the play call might have not included any post-snap reads because the goal of the play might have simply been to pick up 1-2 yards in a short situation, and that yes it all happens in a flash so it can be hard to expect the best outcome every time, but he was of the opinion that Rodgers should have made a read there.

So looks like yall are right [mention]go pak go[/mention]

texas wrote: ↑

29 Oct 2022 22:28

texas wrote: ↑

29 Oct 2022 14:23

go pak go wrote: ↑

29 Oct 2022 11:12

I want to address the Texas post because it is starting to gain steam and once again "blame" is being placed elsewhere.

1. The offensive line did its job. Under no circumstance was Rodgers under any duress.

2. This play has been analyzed by a lot of smart people. We know the play. Amari does a little hook route towards the left center of the field (about 4 yards out), Doubs does a flat route toward the sideline and Watkins does a go route. This is a fantastic play because you have 3 WRs in a bunch all going three different ways that makes the defense choose which one to take away. Like the advantage is TOTALLY on the offense here because the offense knows the play. The defense does not. The offense knows that Watkins isn't going to block the CB...the defense does not. Like we have to remember this.

All Rodgers had to do was run the actual play. Under no circumstance is the play "throw immediately to Doubs". That is a stupid playcall because the play doesn't make sense to have that. If it was a throw immediately to Doubs, you wouldn't see 11 and 8 run routes. You would instead see them blocking.

No. This play was simply letting the QB analyze the defense and attack their weak spot. It was set up beautifully for the offense but instead it was executed very poorly.

This forum has no issue Monday-morning quarterbacking almost anything but then the meer notion that "we couldn't know what this play call is" when we actually know EXACTLY what this playcall is...is ridiculous.

This was a huge play in the game. The play call was there. The offensive line blocking was there. Everything lined up perfectly for this play to be at worst an easy first down or at best a TD. All that needed to happen was the right decision by the QB to attack the defensive weakspot. And the QB couldn't have done any worse on this particular play.

I'm in no way someone who defers to experts (in this case the coaches or players), so they (Rodgers or coaches) could have absolutely done something stupid, and we fans could absolutely know better. But my post was asking why we know all of these things.

Like yeah, it probably would make sense to have WRs block if we wanted to throw immediately to Doubs, but what's to say this wasn't one of those 20% plays where Watkins was supposed to block? What's to say that one of their defenders had some tendency that Rodgers knew about (from film study) that made Doubs the obvious choice here? There are a lot of what-ifs here.

I'm going to ask my friend on this one. Maybe you all are right.

He said Rodgers should have thrown to Watkins

He did say that the play call might have not included any post-snap reads because the goal of the play might have simply been to pick up 1-2 yards in a short situation, and that yes it all happens in a flash so it can be hard to expect the best outcome every time, but he was of the opinion that Rodgers should have made a read there.

So looks like yall are right @go pak go

Yeah it's not the decision of who the ball should have gone to. It's the process that the QB took to not allow the weakness in the defense be exposed.

Like this playcall was FANTASTIC. We had em hook, line and sinker on this play and we failed to convert all because the QB was impatient.

This one has to be real frustrating to MLF because this should have been discussed as a great play call but instead will get forgotten about.

go pak go wrote: ↑

30 Oct 2022 08:37

texas wrote: ↑

29 Oct 2022 22:28

texas wrote: ↑

29 Oct 2022 14:23

I'm in no way someone who defers to experts (in this case the coaches or players), so they (Rodgers or coaches) could have absolutely done something stupid, and we fans could absolutely know better. But my post was asking why we know all of these things.

Like yeah, it probably would make sense to have WRs block if we wanted to throw immediately to Doubs, but what's to say this wasn't one of those 20% plays where Watkins was supposed to block? What's to say that one of their defenders had some tendency that Rodgers knew about (from film study) that made Doubs the obvious choice here? There are a lot of what-ifs here.

I'm going to ask my friend on this one. Maybe you all are right.

He said Rodgers should have thrown to Watkins

He did say that the play call might have not included any post-snap reads because the goal of the play might have simply been to pick up 1-2 yards in a short situation, and that yes it all happens in a flash so it can be hard to expect the best outcome every time, but he was of the opinion that Rodgers should have made a read there.

So looks like yall are right @go pak go

Yeah it's not the decision of who the ball should have gone to. It's the process that the QB took to not allow the weakness in the defense be exposed.

Like this playcall was FANTASTIC. We had em hook, line and sinker on this play and we failed to convert all because the QB was impatient.

This one has to be real frustrating to MLF because this should have been discussed as a great play call but instead will get forgotten about.

Has Lafluer said Rodgers should have thrown to Watkins, or that Rodgers had the option? has Rodgers or anyone else said he had a option, people other then click bait pushers and ink salesman? the throw to Amari looked like the play called, also the blocking wasn't that good that Rodgers could wait for Watkins to clear, Jenkins was already beaten and the rusher was free.

WAtkins should have run his route wider, his job on that play was to drag the DB with him, Doubs has to sell his route to bring the CB with him, so he can turn around and shield the CB from Amari, and the WR's can't block till the reception is made

your listening to people who's job it is to attract readers, they slant there articles in the direction that will most attract them, but they don't know any more then you or I what the play call was, we needed one yard, Rodgers completion % on throws over 20 yards is low, his completion % under 20 is higher, does that even register with you? the throw to Amari was the call all along, go watch the play again.

people that want to expose Rodgers for not being as good as he was before are having a field day with this play, and there comments are nothing but supposition and guesses.

I just said Rodgers looks at fault on that play

What happened with this quote? Here I thought Rodgers screwed up on that 4th down, especially after Watkins was wide open on that play. Instead we're fighting over who is gonna catch the ball between Watkins, Doubs and Rodgers? I thought that part was in the know.

They must have seen something that gave it away on film, we have any comments from Washington on that?

Yoop wrote: ↑

30 Oct 2022 09:54

Has Lafluer said Rodgers should have thrown to Watkins, or that Rodgers had the option? has Rodgers or anyone else said he had a option, people other then click bait pushers and ink salesman? the throw to Amari looked like the play called, also the blocking wasn't that good that Rodgers could wait for Watkins to clear, Jenkins was already beaten and the rusher was free.

WAtkins should have run his route wider, his job on that play was to drag the DB with him, Doubs has to sell his route to bring the CB with him, so he can turn around and shield the CB from Amari, and the WR's can't block till the reception is made

your listening to people who's job it is to attract readers, they slant there articles in the direction that will most attract them, but they don't know any more then you or I what the play call was, we needed one yard, Rodgers completion % on throws over 20 yards is low, his completion % under 20 is higher, does that even register with you? the throw to Amari was the call all along, go watch the play again.

people that want to expose Rodgers for not being as good as he was before are having a field day with this play, and there comments are nothing but supposition and guesses.

Good frickin grief.

Just saw a bit on Packers issues on ESPN. Showed plays with wide open WRs and AR not throwing the ball to them. Plenty of time. Clean pocket. Just doesn't throw the ball to the open guy.

I'm not sure if even Rodgers admitting he is playing poorly if you wouldn't call him a liar. Not all experts are click bait whores, many are actual journalists. And if their analysis is all getting the same conclusion maybe you should take a closer look and remove your biases.

AmishMafia wrote: ↑

30 Oct 2022 11:51

Yoop wrote: ↑

30 Oct 2022 09:54

Has Lafluer said Rodgers should have thrown to Watkins, or that Rodgers had the option? has Rodgers or anyone else said he had a option, people other then click bait pushers and ink salesman? the throw to Amari looked like the play called, also the blocking wasn't that good that Rodgers could wait for Watkins to clear, Jenkins was already beaten and the rusher was free.

WAtkins should have run his route wider, his job on that play was to drag the DB with him, Doubs has to sell his route to bring the CB with him, so he can turn around and shield the CB from Amari, and the WR's can't block till the reception is made

your listening to people who's job it is to attract readers, they slant there articles in the direction that will most attract them, but they don't know any more then you or I what the play call was, we needed one yard, Rodgers completion % on throws over 20 yards is low, his completion % under 20 is higher, does that even register with you? the throw to Amari was the call all along, go watch the play again.

people that want to expose Rodgers for not being as good as he was before are having a field day with this play, and there comments are nothing but supposition and guesses.

Good frickin grief.

Just saw a bit on Packers issues on ESPN. Showed plays with wide open WRs and AR not throwing the ball to them. Plenty of time. Clean pocket. Just doesn't throw the ball to the open guy.

I'm not sure if even Rodgers admitting he is playing poorly if you wouldn't call him a liar. Not all experts are click bait whores, many are actual journalists. And if their analysis is all getting the same conclusion maybe you should take a closer look and remove your biases.

ESPN is notorious for claiming they know exactly what the play call is, on every play, in every game, and they often show receivers open describing how terrible QB's played in those games, thing is there are often receivers open, and QB's don't throw them the ball on every team and in every game, the over view and hind sight isn't the same as real time and behind center look.

Rodgers ran the called play, and you and others want to turn this into Rodgers should have done what hasn't worked all season, hitting go routes with receivers he has zero chemistry with, the high percentage throw was to Amari, just credit the Wash defense for reading the play.


again who said this was a option play? if you'd bother to look Rodgers got the ball out in less then 1.5 count, and in that short time Jenkins is beaten and the rusher is free, if Rodgers waited for Watkins to clear he'd have to wait another split second and likely been hit first.

whats obvious is that if Rodgers does throw towards where Watson has to get to, and it's not completed you and others would bitch about that to because that seems your goal, double digit mistakes every game, passes dropped a 10 year old could catch.

never said Rodgers has been perfect, but you people look for any thing he possibly didn't do right according to some media clown to bitch about.

Yoop wrote: ↑

30 Oct 2022 09:54

go pak go wrote: ↑

30 Oct 2022 08:37

texas wrote: ↑

29 Oct 2022 22:28

He said Rodgers should have thrown to Watkins

He did say that the play call might have not included any post-snap reads because the goal of the play might have simply been to pick up 1-2 yards in a short situation, and that yes it all happens in a flash so it can be hard to expect the best outcome every time, but he was of the opinion that Rodgers should have made a read there.

So looks like yall are right @go pak go

Yeah it's not the decision of who the ball should have gone to. It's the process that the QB took to not allow the weakness in the defense be exposed.

Like this playcall was FANTASTIC. We had em hook, line and sinker on this play and we failed to convert all because the QB was impatient.

This one has to be real frustrating to MLF because this should have been discussed as a great play call but instead will get forgotten about.

Has Lafluer said Rodgers should have thrown to Watkins, or that Rodgers had the option? has Rodgers or anyone else said he had a option, people other then click bait pushers and ink salesman? the throw to Amari looked like the play called, also the blocking wasn't that good that Rodgers could wait for Watkins to clear, Jenkins was already beaten and the rusher was free.

WAtkins should have run his route wider, his job on that play was to drag the DB with him, Doubs has to sell his route to bring the CB with him, so he can turn around and shield the CB from Amari, and the WR's can't block till the reception is made

your listening to people who's job it is to attract readers, they slant there articles in the direction that will most attract them, but they don't know any more then you or I what the play call was, we needed one yard, Rodgers completion % on throws over 20 yards is low, his completion % under 20 is higher, does that even register with you? the throw to Amari was the call all along, go watch the play again.

people that want to expose Rodgers for not being as good as he was before are having a field day with this play, and there comments are nothing but supposition and guesses.

Honestly yoop you don't need to listen to anyone to understand this play. That is why it is so frustrating it got botched so bad.

This play is very simple to understand. Even someone with a low football IQ like me can easily understand. There is no reason to try and complicate it any further. The only people who are doing it are those who get off by defending Rodgers every chance they get.

You don't need to listen to a coach throw his QB under the bus. You don't need to try and place blame on Watkins for not running a wide enough route (I mean seriously?). And I don't know why you keep talking about Amari who is such an insignificant variable in this play because Washington decided to take him away immediately.

If you watch this play -- keep this play isolated from anything else -- and try to defend the QB based on any other imagination of excuses....it shows you are simply defending the person you deem cannot be touched.

You keep saying "nobody is perfect" and yet never allow anyone to talk about the specific plays that make him imperfect. While at the same time, have zero issue throwing Watkins, Doubs and Jenkins under the bus when none of them honestly could have done any better on the play.

Blows my mind.

go pak go wrote: ↑

30 Oct 2022 12:37

Yoop wrote: ↑

30 Oct 2022 09:54

go pak go wrote: ↑

30 Oct 2022 08:37

Yeah it's not the decision of who the ball should have gone to. It's the process that the QB took to not allow the weakness in the defense be exposed.

Like this playcall was FANTASTIC. We had em hook, line and sinker on this play and we failed to convert all because the QB was impatient.

This one has to be real frustrating to MLF because this should have been discussed as a great play call but instead will get forgotten about.

Has Lafluer said Rodgers should have thrown to Watkins, or that Rodgers had the option? has Rodgers or anyone else said he had a option, people other then click bait pushers and ink salesman? the throw to Amari looked like the play called, also the blocking wasn't that good that Rodgers could wait for Watkins to clear, Jenkins was already beaten and the rusher was free.

WAtkins should have run his route wider, his job on that play was to drag the DB with him, Doubs has to sell his route to bring the CB with him, so he can turn around and shield the CB from Amari, and the WR's can't block till the reception is made

your listening to people who's job it is to attract readers, they slant there articles in the direction that will most attract them, but they don't know any more then you or I what the play call was, we needed one yard, Rodgers completion % on throws over 20 yards is low, his completion % under 20 is higher, does that even register with you? the throw to Amari was the call all along, go watch the play again.

people that want to expose Rodgers for not being as good as he was before are having a field day with this play, and there comments are nothing but supposition and guesses.

Honestly yoop you don't need to listen to anyone to understand this play. That is why it is so frustrating it got botched so bad.

This play is very simple to understand. Even someone with a low football IQ like me can easily understand. There is no reason to try and complicate it any further. The only people who are doing it are those who get off by defending Rodgers every chance they get.

You don't need to listen to a coach throw his QB under the bus. You don't need to try and place blame on Watkins for not running a wide enough route (I mean seriously?). And I don't know why you keep talking about Amari who is such an insignificant variable in this play because Washington decided to take him away immediately.

If you watch this play -- keep this play isolated from anything else -- and try to defend the QB based on any other imagination of excuses....it shows you are simply defending the person you deem cannot be touched.

You keep saying "nobody is perfect" and yet never allow anyone to talk about the specific plays that make him imperfect. While at the same time, have zero issue throwing Watkins, Doubs and Jenkins under the bus when none of them honestly could have done any better on the play.

Blows my mind.

I agreed with Ghost first post, Rodgers made up his mind where the ball was going pre snap, my defense is with the play called, 4 and 1 is a short yardage play, the DB didn't bite on Watkins go route, and the ball was out of Rodgers hand before anything could develop.

again no one seems to know for sure what the called play was, and all the talk is Rodgers is changing out of called plays, now when it doesn't appear so ya blame him for not doing it

99% certain we know what the play call was.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

30 Oct 2022 14:59

99% certain we know what the play call was.

oh really?