Packers Huddle

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

04 May 2021 21:43

APB wrote: ↑

04 May 2021 21:19

Yoop wrote: ↑

04 May 2021 21:10

my biggest complaint, Guty and Murphy hire a coach who's offensive scheme centers on mis direction, and then fail to get him a key player that makes that scheme work

Makes the scheme work? Exactly which part of the scheme didn’t work? What part of the top rated offense wasn’t working?

It may not have been working to your satisfaction or with the players you felt would have optimized the efficiency of the scheme, but there is no way you can sit here and say they didn’t have the pieces to make it work. That’s simply absurd.

It was the top rated offense. They had the players they needed. No, they didn’t have all-pros at every position but they damn sure had players to make the scheme work. I mean, seriously....

I dont think its a fair assessment to say the scheme didnt work when the offense finished 1st in the league.

How much better could the offense be if not 1st in the league? We had the #1 seed and home field through out. Unfortunately the NFCC game wasn't one of our best.

I want a quick reminder here...

2017:
Rodgers was....
...8th in completion percentage
...17th in yards per attempt
...8th in passer rating
...7th in QBR
...4-3 as a starter
then broke his collar bone
Missed the playoffs
Jordy, Cobb, and Nelson each started at least 14 games that year. Adams was a Pro Bowl Alternate
Robert Tonyan was added to the PS
Gutey replaced TT

2018:
Pre-season, Rodgers signed a 4-year, $134 million extension with 2 years left on his deal by Gutenkunst
Jordy Nelson was released
Jimmy Graham was signed, caught 55 passes (8th among TEs in the league)
Moore, MVS, and EQSB are drafted in the 4th, 5th, and 6th rounds (Jaire in the first)
Rodgers was....
...26th in completion percentage
...19th in yards per attempt
...13th in QB rating
...17th in QBR
...6-9-1 as a starter
Missed the playoffs
Cobb was injured almost all year long
Adams made the Pro Bowl
Mike McCarthy was fired with 4 games remaining
Charles Robinson reports Rodgers wants more say in management decisions (coaching search)

2019:
MLF is hired; the media narrative is whether Rodgers and MLF can/will coexist (audibles )
Cobb and Jimmy Graham depart
Gary and Savage are the first round picks; Jenkins in the second. "Weapons" conversation picks up
Rodgers was....
...21st in completion percentage
...18th in yards per attempt
...12th in QB rating
...20th in QBR
...13-3 as a starter
Lost NFC Championship Game
In late December, Rodgers' contract was restructured to guarantee $14.25 million and spread it over the next 5 years.

2020:
Jordan Love is drafted in round one (no WRs drafted at all)
Devin Funchess is signed, but later opts out
Jake Kumerow is cut in final roster cutdowns
Rodgers was....
...1st in completion percentage
...3rd in yards per attempt
...1st in QB rating
...1st in QBR
...13-3 as a starter
...MVP
Lost in the NFC Championship game
Immediate rumblings that Rodgers is displeased


Come up with any/all the reasons you like. There's truth to most of them.

• Yes, the quality of WR from Jordy, Cobb, and Adams to Adams, Cobb and Graham to Adams, Jimmy Graham, and rookies was a decline.

• Yes, MM's scheme relied on superior WR talent to win one-on-one matchups and he didn't adjust when the talent declined

• Yes, Rodgers wanted MM out and had lost respect for his offensive acumen

• Maybe that distaste for MM affected Rodgers' play

But these are the facts. Rodgers was playing as a middle of the road QB in 2017 and 2018. I can pull up comparisons to the likes of Kirk Cousins or Derek Carr or Marcus Mariota in that time frame. Rodgers, in his first year with a new scheme, had some growing pains. It LOOKED better on the field, and the team was winning. But Rodgers' individual numbers still weren't very good.

Despite all this, before Rodgers played a game for his new HC who he did not get a say in selecting, Gutey extended him for the richest new money/new year contract in NFL history; and Rodgers signed that deal. Rodgers' deal was restructured one year later to further entrench him to the team by pushing dead money into future years if he is traded or released.

Then Rodgers became the MVP. And now this.

Like I said, add all the interpretations and explanations you want. This is a chronological listing of facts.

Pugger wrote: ↑

05 May 2021 07:49

https://cheeseheadtv.com/blog/rodgers-v ... ective-254

I really enjoyed the levity in this column; thanks for bringing it here

My only problem with it is all the trash that's been leaked.

And how Rodgers is exploiting the asymmetry of respectability; the team isn't going to jump in the slop with him and start leaking garbage right back. He knows this because he watched Brett do it; 99% of the Farve narrative was driven by Bus and Brett, the team did not communicated off the record via backchannels to the press, they were direct and professional about it, because they have to be.

Rodgers and his people are way out of line with this crap.

Waldo wrote: ↑

05 May 2021 08:06

My only problem with it is all the trash that's been leaked.

And how Rodgers is exploiting the asymmetry of respectability; the team isn't going to jump in the slop with him and start leaking garbage right back. He knows this because he watched Brett do it; 99% of the Farve narrative was driven by Bus and Brett, the team did not communicated off the record via backchannels to the press, they were direct and professional about it, because they have to be.

Rodgers and his people are way out of line with this crap.

Not sure about that one.

Alot of the media reports have been very team favorable ... Doing everything they can ... Gone to see him multiple times etc

These are sophisticated professionals that know how to work the media.

Big Dog, supposedly someone VERY close to Rodgers, was as shocked by this as we were.

And just know, Big Dog doesn't likely resign if he knew there was a riff. That is why all of this is so strange.

I also really want to focus in on the 2019 contract restructure. Literally 4 months before drafting Jordan Love, the Packers voluntarily did a restructure (no word on whether Rodgers needed to or chose to sign off on it or not) that would accomplish the following:

• clear ~$12 million in cap space to the 2019 cap

• Create ~$8 million in new dead money if Rodgers is traded/released before 2021

• Create ~$5 million in new dead money if Rodgers is traded/released before 2022

Now, $5 million and $8 million are not insurmountable numbers, but in addition to the ~$33 million and ~$22 million that already existed from his 2018 extension, this was a pretty strong indication that the team was committed to Rodgers through the 2021 season, at least.

I said that when we drafted Love--that there is no contradiction in those two actions; there is is clear commitment to Rodgers for 2 more seasons. And that there is a clear commitment to develop Love as his backup and potential heir.

The LIKELIEST scenario, in fact, was keeping Rodgers through 2022, as he had ~$11 million in dead cap for 2022 plus the additional ~$3 million from the restructure.

If this was all about enhancing the guarantees or the commitment through 2022, then it would have taken a relatively minor change and should have been an easy communication.

But FINANACIALLY, despite picking Love in 2020, the Packers a couple months earlier had basically committed to Rodgers for 2020 and 2021 and very probably 2022. That's always been true. Money talks. And it talked clearly to me that Rodgers wasn't going anywhere for 2, if not 3 years.

I really struggle with the impression that the team might be thinking about getting rid of Rodgers before that that seemed to develop when they picked Love. Draft picks come and go but dead money locks you in.

go pak go wrote: ↑

05 May 2021 08:16

Big Dog, supposedly someone VERY close to Rodgers, was as shocked by this as we were.

And just know, Big Dog doesn't likely resign if he knew there was a riff. That is why all of this is so strange.

This and the live AJ Hawk reaction on Pat McAfee give me a little hope.

One) neither seemed to know or expect it to blow up this much
Two) This video, he balances his support for Rodgers without taking sides. He says the normal "business first" thing but doesn't seem mad at anyone himself. It's an indication that among team leadership, hopefully this sort of stays between Rodgers and Gutey/Murphy and doesn't trickle down into players picking sides Rodgers versus management, as most would side with a player and that could spell doom for management.

Something rattling around in my brain as far as what could have tipped this, recently, in the direction it is now. This is reading WAY into the tea leaves, but just given the subtle support Rodgers has received from Davante Adams, have the Packers already decided and possibly made it known that Adams does not have a future beyond 2021? The time for an extension was seemingly in the works when we desperately needed it and then it kind of quieted down. If it's clear the gap is too big and the Packers are moving on, could this have been the final straw? Certainly, impacting Adams directly would lend some reason to him sticking his neck out for his buddy. It's a long shot, but it is something that would certainly seem to fit what is actually happening.

When it comes to appeasing AR or giving him some extra benefits, the question is how far would you be willing to go to keep him happy (or to have kept him happy)?

1) No privileges. He's a player, and gets paid handsomely for playing, no need for any special treatment
2) Courtesy call privileges. Keep AR in the loop in major decisions, and in minor ones involving the O, but don't give him even an illusion he could influence said decisions
3) Being a voice in decisions privileges. Ask his opinion in major team decisions and all the smaller ones involving the O and his friends, consider it as weighty as a senior pro scout's opinion, but make it clear sometimes the team may have to go another way
4) Power to decide/veto minor roster moves. Give AR the chance to decide selective bottom-of-roster player moves, especially on O and when it comes to his friends. Maybe let him make a draft pick in lower rounds, or sign a targeted mid-to-low budget FA
5) Power to decide/veto major personnel decisions. Selective GM powers, especially on O. Give AR the power to be in the war room and veto/decide early draft picks, let him dictate which FAs and trades to go after, and decide whom to re-sign and let go
6) Full GM powers. Every personnel decision goes through him. Let him fire and choose coaches
7) Owner powers. Gets to decide the GM and everyone else. If he wants to rename the stadium Sheilene field, or move the team to LA, let him

Waldo wrote: ↑

05 May 2021 08:06

My only problem with it is all the trash that's been leaked.

And how Rodgers is exploiting the asymmetry of respectability; the team isn't going to jump in the slop with him and start leaking garbage right back. He knows this because he watched Brett do it; 99% of the Farve narrative was driven by Bus and Brett, the team did not communicated off the record via backchannels to the press, they were direct and professional about it, because they have to be.

Rodgers and his people are way out of line with this crap.

the Packers FO always sticks there best foot forward, lockers too, they hand carried Favres Locker down to Kiln so he could have a front lawn ornament as a gesture of love (no pun intended) obviously, right? in that instance Ted and McCarthy said all the right stuff outwordly, but you know both wanted to be rid of Favre, he had become a cancer, same thing now with Rodgers, it's called covering your back side, it's no sweat for the FO if they can look innocent, get rid of Rodgers and lose, same as it was for Ted and Mike, in fact we did slump a bit, same thing going forward.

both Murphy for his team management, and Guty for acting arrogant share as much blame as Rodgers for this situation, just because they say all the right stuff now doesn't absolve them with this, crips if Lynch can call up Jimmy G and explain his draft thoughts or team decisions, then Guty could have done the same with Rodgers.

salmar80 wrote: ↑

05 May 2021 08:49

When it comes to appeasing AR or giving him some extra benefits, the question is how far would you be willing to go to keep him happy (or to have kept him happy)?

1) No privileges. He's a player, and gets paid handsomely for playing, no need for any special treatment
2) Courtesy call privileges. Keep AR in the loop in major decisions, and in minor ones involving the O, but don't give him even an illusion he could influence said decisions
3) Being a voice in decisions privileges. Ask his opinion in major team decisions and all the smaller ones involving the O and his friends, consider it as weighty as a senior pro scout's opinion, but make it clear sometimes the team may have to go another way
4) Power to decide/veto minor roster moves. Give AR the chance to decide selective bottom-of-roster player moves, especially on O and when it comes to his friends. Maybe let him make a draft pick in lower rounds, or sign a targeted mid-to-low budget FA
5) Power to decide/veto major personnel decisions. Selective GM powers, especially on O. Give AR the power to be in the war room and veto/decide early draft picks, let him dictate which FAs and trades to go after, and decide whom to re-sign and let go
6) Full GM powers. Every personnel decision goes through him. Let him fire and choose coaches
7) Owner powers. Gets to decide the GM and everyone else. If he wants to rename the stadium Sheilene field, or move the team to LA, let him

I'm at a 3. Which, by the way, is what I think he already has and has had.

I could see a partial bit of 4. Just, like, for instance, more heavily weight some of that input, but never let him pick a drafted player. Rodgers doesn't scout guys. He has no idea who will be good.

The biggest flaw was actually in level 2, where the Packers just seem not to be communicating very effectively with players. They might need to hire someone specifically to manage those sorts of things as a courtesy. That's been a thing for a while, and not just with Rodgers. The Linsley thing; I think it was similar with maybe TJ Lang or something. When they aren't re-signing a player the guy just gets crickets instead of conversations and transparency. It's been an ongoing problem that has never rubbed me the right way

NCF wrote: ↑

05 May 2021 08:36

Something rattling around in my brain as far as what could have tipped this, recently, in the direction it is now. This is reading WAY into the tea leaves, but just given the subtle support Rodgers has received from Davante Adams, have the Packers already decided and possibly made it known that Adams does not have a future beyond 2021? The time for an extension was seemingly in the works when we desperately needed it and then it kind of quieted down. If it's clear the gap is too big and the Packers are moving on, could this have been the final straw? Certainly, impacting Adams directly would lend some reason to him sticking his neck out for his buddy. It's a long shot, but it is something that would certainly seem to fit what is actually happening.

This is the only thing I can actually understand would make sense.

Like you said, likely reading into the tea leaves a bit much, but maybe Adams and the Packers discovered how far apart they actually are and Rodgers got whiff of it.

What's great about the situation if Rodgers is to return, which let's face it he doesn't have many options here...

....is that the front office doesn't have to see or interact with players very much. It's not like with MM where there was a rift but they were actively planning together all the time.

Rodgers works with the players and MLF. And because the "chain of command" setup put MLF and Gutey is separate wings that each report to Murphy, if Rodgers has an organizational issue, he's not "going over" anyone to talk to Murphy. Gutenkunst is the team's GM, but technically not in Rodgers' chain of command. The separation is weird; and it makes it tricky for me to figure out who to give credit for the hire of MLF between Gutey and Murphy.... but in this case, it might help insulate these two guys from each other and keep the work environment in the building friendly and fun instead of tense and passive aggressive. Again, if Rodgers comes back.

Another thing that is interesting is that the new CBA doesn't allow teams to waive fines for holding out. So if Rodgers skips training camp and then wants to come back, the team literally cannot offer the "we'll forget about those fines" olive branch that is the norm. Once Rodgers starts missing training camp time, the money piles up quickly, and his inability to reach free agency on schedule starts getting affected.

On the Adams stuff, it's certainly possible, but I can't imagine that makes any organizational sense.

I know they were trying to extend Z and couldn't find an agreement; and that makes some sense to me. But Adams absolutely has to be retained, and it WILL cost making him the highest paid WR in the league, and the sooner the better both for potential cap relief and for the potential that other WRs will raise that bar in the waiting period.

If I'm the Packers, my goal #1 this month is a Davante Adams extension to right the ship and provide that stability. Like I said about Rodgers' restructure, let the money talk.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

05 May 2021 07:45

Yes, the quality of WR from Jordy, Cobb, and Adams to Adams, Cobb and Graham to Adams, Jimmy Graham, and rookies was a decline.
Yes, MM's scheme relied on superior WR talent to win one-on-one matchups and he didn't adjust when the talent declined
Yes, Rodgers wanted MM out and had lost respect for his offensive acumen
Maybe that distaste for MM affected Rodgers' play

good points Yoho, hard to argue with them, I do think McCarthy was passive with Rodgers to a extent, it was rumored that Rodgers quit using called plays during the last part of Mikes last season, probably should have been benched.

I think the decline with Nelson and Cobb, both due to injury's was bigger then you describe, he was easily covered by the CB's we faced, and Cobb couldn't do what had made him a threat prior.

and with 017 only MVS of the 3 draft picks did anything at all, and only because of his speed, hard to blame Rodgers when his only real impact receiver is always blanketed, it shows just how good Adams is and how poorly the rest are.

obviously the FO didn't think the problem was Rodgers or they wouldn't have given him that contract, and to appease him further they restructured it later, course that mostly seems like a way to save 2020 cap money.

NCF wrote: ↑

05 May 2021 08:36

Something rattling around in my brain as far as what could have tipped this, recently, in the direction it is now. This is reading WAY into the tea leaves, but just given the subtle support Rodgers has received from Davante Adams, have the Packers already decided and possibly made it known that Adams does not have a future beyond 2021? The time for an extension was seemingly in the works when we desperately needed it and then it kind of quieted down. If it's clear the gap is too big and the Packers are moving on, could this have been the final straw? Certainly, impacting Adams directly would lend some reason to him sticking his neck out for his buddy. It's a long shot, but it is something that would certainly seem to fit what is actually happening.

This scenario would make me very wary of Packer's management. Letting go of a HOF QB and WR (still in his prime) is beyond stupid. It would say to me that money is more important than winning.

williewasgreat wrote: ↑

05 May 2021 09:29

NCF wrote: ↑

05 May 2021 08:36

Something rattling around in my brain as far as what could have tipped this, recently, in the direction it is now. This is reading WAY into the tea leaves, but just given the subtle support Rodgers has received from Davante Adams, have the Packers already decided and possibly made it known that Adams does not have a future beyond 2021? The time for an extension was seemingly in the works when we desperately needed it and then it kind of quieted down. If it's clear the gap is too big and the Packers are moving on, could this have been the final straw? Certainly, impacting Adams directly would lend some reason to him sticking his neck out for his buddy. It's a long shot, but it is something that would certainly seem to fit what is actually happening.

This scenario would make me very wary of Packer's management. Letting go of a HOF QB and WR (still in his prime) is beyond stupid. It would say to me that money is more important than winning.

thing is though look at all the fair value contracts we've given out, and what money are we rolling in now, I'd think the FO is working on doing a deal as we speak with Adams, just that they don't alow the media to get involved with raising the anti, I can see why a team is closed lip about contract extensions

Yoop wrote: ↑

05 May 2021 09:15

good points Yoho, hard to argue with them, I do think McCarthy was passive with Rodgers to a extent, it was rumored that Rodgers quit using called plays during the last part of Mikes last season, probably should have been benched.

I think the decline with Nelson and Cobb, both due to injury's was bigger then you describe, he was easily covered by the CB's we faced, and Cobb couldn't do what had made him a threat prior.

and with 017 only MVS of the 3 draft picks did anything at all, and only because of his speed, hard to blame Rodgers when his only real impact receiver is always blanketed, it shows just how good Adams is and how poorly the rest are.

obviously the FO didn't think the problem was Rodgers or they wouldn't have given him that contract, and to appease him further they restructured it later, course that mostly seems like a way to save 2020 cap money.

The decline of Nelson's explosion, leading to his release, and the 2018 Cobb injuries were devastating. No one expected the 4th, 5th, and 6th round picks to be playing that kind of role as rookies. It was really bad. I'm not denying it.

It was WORSE because MM still needed his WRs to win one-on-one.

Why I bring all of this up is because it PROVES that Aaron Rodgers alone is not enough. I heard on the radio the other day "As long as you have Rodgers you can pencil the team into the playoffs and at least possibly a super bowl contender" and I thought "my what short memories we have."

What these numbers and patterns indicate is that even a talent such as Rodgers requires a good coaching staff, and scheme, and players around him. What they show is that the team around Rodgers improved when Gutey got hired. The scheme around Rodgers improved when MLF got hired.

This 4-year outlook conclusively demonstrates that Gutey and MLF were instrumental in revitalizing Rodgers' career. That the organization, far from abandoning him or leaving him out to dry or mistreating him, helped lift him out of a slump, gave him the league's richest contract (at the time) and built around making him the best player he can be. That without the personnel moves made by Gutey and the scheme designed by MLF, Rodgers was languishing.

And yes, there are REASONS for that. But the fact that it happened proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that the 13-3 seasons and the NFC Championship games were not Rodgers succeeding despite his team, despite his GM, and despite his scheme... but in large part BECAUSE of those things. That giving Rodgers MLF and giving Rodgers a great running game and giving Rodgers an improved defense and giving Rodgers a massive extension and financial commitment in 2018 CANNOT be ignored. They cannot be written into a narrative of mistreatment. They can not be warped to tell the story that Rodgers willed his way to the NFC Championships games of his own volition, and not because of the help around him.

Rodgers needed a new scheme to succeed. And he needed a better team to succeed. Rodgers wanted a financial commitment by the team, and was given it. In short, this organization gave Rodgers everything he needs to succeed within 3 years EXCEPT a high caliber #2 WR. That is the ONLY thing he wasn't given. And yet, the fact that he was not given that is the ONLY thing most media narratives want to talk about.