Packers Huddle

Posted: **11 Jan 2023 16:18**

Labrev wrote: ↑
11 Jan 2023 15:33

Yoop wrote: ↑
11 Jan 2023 15:10

go pak go wrote: ↑
11 Jan 2023 13:49

You are correct.

And I'm pretty sure it was Lazard again who broke free and would have been wide open over the middle (since it was a double ILB blitz).
I don't even have to go look at that play to know your just nitpicking, Rodgers had no time to scan a route tree, he barely got rid of the ball as it was, it ended up getting picked as a result of Rodgers not even having time to step into the throw.

If Rodger is still considered the best QB to lead this team next year, then guess who the QB will be.
Considered the best by who, that same FO you're always saying is incompetent and should not be agreed with?

well one thing is for sure, your input on this wont be needed

Posted: **11 Jan 2023 16:20**

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑
11 Jan 2023 16:02
Lions sent the heat. Dillon actually blew the blitz pickup. He blocked literally no one. Rodgers could have stepped up for a better throw or had the time to see Lazard.

I don’t see many Packers fans mention that.

course they wouldn't mention this, it would limit the blame game on Rodgers

Posted: **11 Jan 2023 16:22**

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑
11 Jan 2023 16:02
Lions sent the heat. Dillon actually blew the blitz pickup. He blocked literally no one. Rodgers could have stepped up for a better throw or had the time to see Lazard.

I don’t see many Packers fans mention that.

Some don't want to point out mistakes by anyone other than 12. The QB gets all the glory when the team wins and almost all the blame when they lose.

Posted: **11 Jan 2023 16:29**

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑
11 Jan 2023 16:02
Lions sent the heat. Dillon actually blew the blitz pickup. He blocked literally no one. Rodgers could have stepped up for a better throw or had the time to see Lazard.

I don’t see many Packers fans mention that.

He didn't need "time to see" Lazard was open. He should have remembered how this play unfolded last time, and should have known based on both this prior experience and the Lions' coverage that he would be.

Nor for that matter did he need to *see* that Watson was double-covered and throwing a low-percentage pass to him is a terrible idea, for the same reasons.

Sorry, but this is just a massive L by Rodgers. The only ones who can take a bigger L are LaFleur and Gute for knowing this and still sticking by Rodgers next year, not to mention doing so after he just threw both of them under the bus in his exit presser.

Posted: **11 Jan 2023 16:33**

go pak go wrote: ↑
11 Jan 2023 15:37

Yoop wrote: ↑
11 Jan 2023 15:10

go pak go wrote: ↑
11 Jan 2023 13:49

You are correct.

And I'm pretty sure it was Lazard again who broke free and would have been wide open over the middle (since it was a double ILB blitz).
I don't even have to go look at that play to know your just nitpicking, Rodgers had no time to scan a route tree, he barely got rid of the ball as it was, it ended up getting picked as a result of Rodgers not even having time to step into the throw.

Absolutely not nitpicking. Good players of Madden let along the smartest to ever play the game should know the basic concept that a middle crosser will be wide open if the safeties stay deep and the ILB's are coming on a blitz. There is no need to scan a route tree. He knows the play. He can see what the defense is doing. He should know immediately where the open spot is. It's why I don't buy the thumb excuse. His issues were far more about decision making than physical making in 2022. I don't care if people were in his face. There was a time when legend Aaron would have eaten that blitz alive. Legend Aaron would have invited that blitz. Wanted that blitz.

If only your level of expectation on a smart veteran quarterback of field reading and reaction was as high as your expectation of a wide receiver's catch radius.

And yes. If the front office thinks we are considerably better off trying to squeeze the Rodgers juice at immense future team cost versus rolling with Jordan Love, my viewpoint of the coaching staff and management will be very, very low. It will make your rants of no wide receivers since 2002 look meaningless. I can forgive them being delusional in the 2022 offseason. I won't forgive them if they double down and do it again. It will set our organization back years.

you lost me with your two drop bs, you nit pick Rodgers about anything and everything.

I sorta figured you went to Madden school of football 101, 2 deep safety's is just two deep safety's it doesn't guarantee a thing, and as I said Rodgers didn't have time to see what Lazard was doing, but I think you know all this, but your motive is never to support Rodgers, got that, Dillon didn't pick up the rusher, and Rodgers had to get rid of the ball, if he'd have taken a sack you'd be whining about that.

Posted: **11 Jan 2023 16:33**

Yoop wrote: ↑
11 Jan 2023 16:18

Labrev wrote: ↑
11 Jan 2023 15:33

Yoop wrote: ↑
11 Jan 2023 15:10

I don't even have to go look at that play to know your just nitpicking, Rodgers had no time to scan a route tree, he barely got rid of the ball as it was, it ended up getting picked as a result of Rodgers not even having time to step into the throw.

If Rodger is still considered the best QB to lead this team next year, then guess who the QB will be.
Considered the best by who, that same FO you're always saying is incompetent and should not be agreed with?
well one thing is for sure, your input on this wont be needed

Wow, such blind loyalty to the FO. Why do you lick Gute's balls so much??

Posted: **11 Jan 2023 16:41**

Yoop wrote: ↑
11 Jan 2023 16:33

go pak go wrote: ↑
11 Jan 2023 15:37

Yoop wrote: ↑
11 Jan 2023 15:10

I don't even have to go look at that play to know your just nitpicking, Rodgers had no time to scan a route tree, he barely got rid of the ball as it was, it ended up getting picked as a result of Rodgers not even having time to step into the throw.

Absolutely not nitpicking. Good players of Madden let along the smartest to ever play the game should know the basic concept that a middle crosser will be wide open if the safeties stay deep and the ILB's are coming on a blitz. There is no need to scan a route tree. He knows the play. He can see what the defense is doing. He should know immediately where the open spot is. It's why I don't buy the thumb excuse. His issues were far more about decision making than physical making in 2022. I don't care if people were in his face. There was a time when legend Aaron would have eaten that blitz alive. Legend Aaron would have invited that blitz. Wanted that blitz.

If only your level of expectation on a smart veteran quarterback of field reading and reaction was as high as your expectation of a wide receiver's catch radius.

And yes. If the front office thinks we are considerably better off trying to squeeze the Rodgers juice at immense future team cost versus rolling with Jordan Love, my viewpoint of the coaching staff and management will be very, very low. It will make your rants of no wide receivers since 2002 look meaningless. I can forgive them being delusional in the 2022 offseason. I won't forgive them if they double down and do it again. It will set our organization back years.
you lost me with your two drop bs, you nit pick Rodgers about anything and everything.

I sorta figured you went to Madden school of football 101, 2 deep safety's is just two deep safety's it doesn't guarantee a thing, and as I said Rodgers didn't have time to see what Lazard was doing, but I think you know all this, but your motive is never to support Rodgers, got that, Dillon didn't pick up the rusher, and Rodgers had to get rid of the ball, if he'd have taken a sack you'd be whining about that.

Why would Rodgers need to see what Lazard was doing? He knows what Lazard was doing! You don't think Rodgers doesn't know the play?!

And are you insinuating that throwing a prayer ball to a player who is double covered down the sideline on a key down was the right thing to do? How could you possibly defend "he didn't know what Lazard was doing" but then not key in on the worst decision of that play?

All you need to know that the middle would be wide open is to understand when you take something out of an area (the two ILBs who are coming at you)...that area will be open.

This is also the same guy who thought it would be a good idea to say "chill Alaska" and give an end around on 4th and inches at his own 30 yardline rather than keep the ball and sneak it with a huge gap between the center and guards.

And yes. Dillon should have chose one of the blitzers and not try and do both. And yes. Dillon had a horrible, horrible drop. Our RBs let us down tremendously on Sunday on a few plays.

Posted: **11 Jan 2023 16:44**

Labrev wrote: ↑
11 Jan 2023 16:29

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑
11 Jan 2023 16:02
Lions sent the heat. Dillon actually blew the blitz pickup. He blocked literally no one. Rodgers could have stepped up for a better throw or had the time to see Lazard.

I don’t see many Packers fans mention that.
He didn't need "time to see" Lazard was open. He should have remembered how this play unfolded last time, and should have known based on both this prior experience and the Lions' coverage that he would be.

Nor for that matter did he need to *see* that Watson was double-covered and throwing a low-percentage pass to him is a terrible idea, for the same reasons.

Sorry, but this is just a massive L by Rodgers. The only ones who can take a bigger L are LaFleur and Gute for knowing this and still sticking by Rodgers next year, not to mention doing so after he just threw both of them under the bus in his exit presser.

he's damned from you no matter what, people that have never played this game, think doing Madden makes them a authority, there is no way Rodgers had time to look for Lazard, who falls down making a simple cut, twice this season going across the middle was more then his feet could handle, and he kissed the dang tundra.
you would have loved Favre, the guy was a pick waiting to happen, course you probably don't remember him much, Rodgers has been so much better then that guy, if you dislike Rodgers this much I can't wait to hear your reaction to Love or possibly the doz, that might migrate through 1265 in the next 10 years or so, your just another spoiled Packer fan.

Posted: **11 Jan 2023 16:58**

Labrev wrote: ↑
11 Jan 2023 16:33

Yoop wrote: ↑
11 Jan 2023 16:18

Labrev wrote: ↑
11 Jan 2023 15:33

Considered the best by who, that same FO you're always saying is incompetent and should not be agreed with?
well one thing is for sure, your input on this wont be needed
Wow, such blind loyalty to the FO. Why do you lick Gute's balls so much??

haa, I hate this FO, we could fire everyone from Murph on down, but I'am no ordinary dummy, I know what side the butter is on, and it sure as &%$@ isn't on a QB with very little exposure like Love.

you and your Buddy GPG have refused all year to realize poor pass pro, translates to a concentration issues for a QB, when our OL are pushed back repeatedly the QB losses faith in his blocking which means he has his mind on more then just reading a route tree, couple that with not knowing exactly which direction his receiver will cut to because they've been screwing that up, these issues got better at times and then got worse again, better, worse, then the wheels feel off again Sunday.

I know one thing, this years addition of Rodgers is not who he is, he's a hell of a lot better, and that would be the reason the clowns at 1265 will bring him back.

Posted: **11 Jan 2023 17:04**

Yoop wrote: ↑
11 Jan 2023 16:44
he's damned from you no matter what, people that have never played this game, think doing Madden makes them a authority, there is no way Rodgers had time to look for Lazard, who falls down making a simple cut, twice this season going across the middle was more then his feet could handle, and he kissed the dang tundra.
you would have loved Favre, the guy was a pick waiting to happen, course you probably don't remember him much, Rodgers has been so much better then that guy, if you dislike Rodgers this much I can't wait to hear your reaction to Love or possibly the doz, that migrate through 1265 in the next 10 years or so, your just another spoiled Packer fan.

Hey, I wanted Favre run out of town in 2008, why shouldn't I want Rodgers out in 2022...oops I mean 2023? It's the same thing.

Posted: **11 Jan 2023 17:24**

go pak go wrote: ↑
11 Jan 2023 16:41
And yes. Dillon should have chose one of the blitzers and not try and do both. And yes. Dillon had a horrible, horrible drop. Our RBs let us down tremendously on Sunday on a few plays.

doesn't matter if the Lions stunted a doz. Dillon didn't pick up anyone, as with most of the game, the pressure was on Rodgers fast, and the pressure did stop him from stepping into the throw, consequently the ball was short, he completes side line passes like that as well as any QB in the league against over the top safety support all the time

ya know why Dillon and Jones didn't do better, our OL, the OL you and others here brag about, bring stats about &%$@ the bed again, Can't blame the RB's for there lousy blocking

Posted: **11 Jan 2023 17:26**

That's not where you throw it in there situation.

Posted: **11 Jan 2023 17:33**

Crazylegs Starks wrote: ↑
11 Jan 2023 17:04

Yoop wrote: ↑
11 Jan 2023 16:44
he's damned from you no matter what, people that have never played this game, think doing Madden makes them a authority, there is no way Rodgers had time to look for Lazard, who falls down making a simple cut, twice this season going across the middle was more then his feet could handle, and he kissed the dang tundra.
you would have loved Favre, the guy was a pick waiting to happen, course you probably don't remember him much, Rodgers has been so much better then that guy, if you dislike Rodgers this much I can't wait to hear your reaction to Love or possibly the doz, that migrate through 1265 in the next 10 years or so, your just another spoiled Packer fan.
Hey, I wanted Favre run out of town in 2008, why shouldn't I want Rodgers out in 2022...oops I mean 2023? It's the same thing.

you did? I was fine keeping Favre, well at least a month or so before TC started, I guess I'am of the make up, if it works don't change it

I know one thing, the Rodgers we saw this season is a anomaly, poor pass pro, and lack of receiver experience troubled us all season, got better at times depending on who we played, then injury caused that to regress again.

who knows what will happen, I'am cool either way.

Posted: **11 Jan 2023 17:36**

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑
11 Jan 2023 17:26
That's not where you throw it in there situation.

do you even read what your responding to?

you can easily see why the ball went where it did, put down the bottle

Posted: **11 Jan 2023 17:39**

Yoop wrote: ↑
11 Jan 2023 16:44
there is no way Rodgers had time to look for Lazard,

When you say that Rodgers needed time to "look" for Lazard, you are saying that like he needed time in addition to the time he was given before he threw it, as if to say he would have THEN looked at Lazard and "found" him open.

What you are not getting is, he didn't NEED extra time to "see" Lazard was open. He didn't need to "scan" all around the field in the first place.

All he needed to *know* that Lazard was open, before he saw it with his eyes, was the call (which he knew before the snap) and the defense's coverage (which one can usually tell before the snap or within a second after snapping).

The problem is he was looking for the wrong guy (Watson) first. And then yeah, the pressure got to him so he just went where he was looking.

But that's exactly why he should have looked for Lazard first knowing what happened last time (a.k.a. EXPERIENCE) rather than locking onto his favorite WR like a rookie QB. Isn't that the whole point of having an old, experienced Rodgers over a young gun like Love?

And this is Rodgers we are talking about, the guy who famously throws "no look"-passes based off of sheer IQ.

who falls down making a simple cut, twice this season going across the middle was more then his feet could handle, and he kissed the dang tundra.

It really doesn't matter if the WR in question is Allen Lazard or Jefftain Justinson or one of the three stooges from 2018.

We have already run this play before and know which WR is going to be open based on the coverage the Lions were playing.

A QB should base his reads on the play and the coverage, not by going down his list in order of "Best-to-Worst WR on the field."

people that have never played this game,

you're out here defending Rodgers's INT by saying Lazard is bad, as if the correct way to play QB is to just look for the best receiver first, then make every read the "next best" receiver, as opposed to... you know, diagnosing the opposing defense.

btw, I have played padded, tackle football competitively. Unless by "this game" you mean NFL-level football, in which case.... neither have you!!

Also I hate Madden, haven't played that game since like 2010.

Posted: **11 Jan 2023 17:42**

Yoop wrote: ↑
11 Jan 2023 16:58

haa, I hate this FO, we could fire everyone from Murph on down,

Sorry, anyone who does not share my exact (and insane) criticisms of the FO is a FO/Gute defender, no matter how much they purport to be critical of or otherwise nuanced about the FO. And making Rodgers QB in 2023 is bad so anyone who disagrees is ipso-facto a FO/Gute defender.

Posted: **11 Jan 2023 17:50**

Yoop wrote: ↑
11 Jan 2023 17:36

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑
11 Jan 2023 17:26
That's not where you throw it in there situation.
do you even read what your responding to?

you can easily see why the ball went where it did, put down the bottle

Again, that's not where you throw in that situation. You throw shallow to intermediate middle. Not to the guy double teamed by the single high safety.

Posted: **11 Jan 2023 17:59**

Labrev wrote: ↑
11 Jan 2023 17:39

Yoop wrote: ↑
11 Jan 2023 16:44
there is no way Rodgers had time to look for Lazard,
When you say that Rodgers needed time to "look" for Lazard, you are saying that like he needed time in addition to the time he was given before he threw it, as if to say he would have THEN looked at Lazard and "found" him open.

What you are not getting is, he didn't NEED extra time to "see" Lazard was open. He didn't need to "scan" all around the field in the first place.

All he needed to *know* that Lazard was open, before he saw it with his eyes, was the call (which he knew before the snap) and the defense's coverage (which one can usually tell before the snap or within a second after snapping).

The problem is he was looking for the wrong guy (Watson) first. And then yeah, the pressure got to him so he just went where he was looking.

But that's exactly why he should have looked for Lazard first knowing what happened last time (a.k.a. EXPERIENCE) rather than locking onto his favorite WR like a rookie QB. Isn't that the whole point of having an old, experienced Rodgers over a young gun like Love?

And this is Rodgers we are talking about, the guy who famously throws "no look"-passes based off of sheer IQ.

who falls down making a simple cut, twice this season going across the middle was more then his feet could handle, and he kissed the dang tundra.
It really doesn't matter if the WR in question is Allen Lazard or Jefftain Justinson or one of the three stooges from 2018.

We have already run this play before and know which WR is going to be open based on the coverage the Lions were playing.

A QB should base his reads on the play and the coverage, not by going down his list in order of "Best-to-Worst WR on the field."

people that have never played this game,
you're out here defending Rodgers's INT by saying Lazard is bad, as if the correct way to play QB is to just look for the best receiver first, then make every read the "next best" receiver, as opposed to... you know, diagnosing the opposing defense.

btw, I have played padded, tackle football competitively. Unless by "this game" you mean NFL-level football, in which case.... neither have you!!

Also I hate Madden, haven't played that game since like 2010.

If you bother to look at the play Lazard is no more open then Watson was when Rodger had to decide where to go, he didn't even get a 2 count to decide, you guys are nit picking a play that could have been a score if Rodgers had time to set up, or time to go to his 2nd read, Lazard

like I said ya should have been around for some of Favres meltdowns, Rodger is a real amature when it comes to late game meltdowns

Posted: **11 Jan 2023 17:59**

Didn’t the Lions send SIX on that interception? I seem to recall that the Pack only had five blockers. Hence, Rodgers felt the pressure and floated the ball more than usual, giving the Safety time to get over for the INT. In that situation, Rodger’s main fault might’ve really been about spotting the pressure from six, not five, and aligning his protection or calling time out. He did neither. (Didn’t we have a TO remaining?) So he might’ve been more at fault prior to the snap than when he threw the ball.

BTW, I don’t usually blame QBs for throwing INTs when they are getting hit. You’re gonna get what you get when that happens. See it all the time from the best QBs.

Posted: **11 Jan 2023 18:07**

It's a single high safety with a double ILB blitz, man coverage underneath. You don't throw the ball there, if a QB is playing within the offense and what a defenses gives, the throw goes over the middle. Throw to where Lazard will be open. Dillion messed up. Both things can be true.

Packers Huddle

Lions @ Packers GDT: Sunday, Jan. 8th, 7:20 PM CST

Re: Lions @ Packers GDT: Sunday, Jan. 8th, 7:20 PM CST

Re: Lions @ Packers GDT: Sunday, Jan. 8th, 7:20 PM CST

Re: Lions @ Packers GDT: Sunday, Jan. 8th, 7:20 PM CST

Re: Lions @ Packers GDT: Sunday, Jan. 8th, 7:20 PM CST

Re: Lions @ Packers GDT: Sunday, Jan. 8th, 7:20 PM CST

Re: Lions @ Packers GDT: Sunday, Jan. 8th, 7:20 PM CST

Re: Lions @ Packers GDT: Sunday, Jan. 8th, 7:20 PM CST

Re: Lions @ Packers GDT: Sunday, Jan. 8th, 7:20 PM CST

Re: Lions @ Packers GDT: Sunday, Jan. 8th, 7:20 PM CST

Re: Lions @ Packers GDT: Sunday, Jan. 8th, 7:20 PM CST

Re: Lions @ Packers GDT: Sunday, Jan. 8th, 7:20 PM CST

Re: Lions @ Packers GDT: Sunday, Jan. 8th, 7:20 PM CST

Re: Lions @ Packers GDT: Sunday, Jan. 8th, 7:20 PM CST

Re: Lions @ Packers GDT: Sunday, Jan. 8th, 7:20 PM CST

Re: Lions @ Packers GDT: Sunday, Jan. 8th, 7:20 PM CST

Re: Lions @ Packers GDT: Sunday, Jan. 8th, 7:20 PM CST

Re: Lions @ Packers GDT: Sunday, Jan. 8th, 7:20 PM CST

Re: Lions @ Packers GDT: Sunday, Jan. 8th, 7:20 PM CST

Re: Lions @ Packers GDT: Sunday, Jan. 8th, 7:20 PM CST

Re: Lions @ Packers GDT: Sunday, Jan. 8th, 7:20 PM CST