Confessions of a Polluted Mindset - Super Bowl Week - Minus the Packers

The Weekly Packers Brain Drain from Jersey Al.

 

Why? That last offensive play against the 49ers still haunts me. We've all given plenty of attention to Rodgers forcing it deep to a double-covered Davante Adams when two other receivers are open, one completely uncovered. But what burns me even more about that play is the call. Who is responsible for calling a bunch of low-percentage deep routes on third down that will likely result in you giving the ball back to the 49ers? LaFleur? Rodgers? It's third and eleven. Scheme up some 15 yard patterns and hit the first one you see open. Just try to get the first down and then YOU will have a chance to win the game. You could be playing this Sunday! It still burns...

RodgersSpeculationSZN - When I get google notifictions from sites like Festivals-India.com that blare out, "NFL World Reacts to latest Aaron Rodgers News," it's obvious the industry known as "Aaron Rodgers Speculation" is generating a ton of revenue and has gone global. (oh, and if I'm TheSpun.com, I'm suing. I thought they invented the whole "NFL World reacts..." thing)

Reactive, not Proactive - Seems to me the Packers, starting with McCarthy era, have been good about addressing on the field issues the year after those issues became a major problem on the field. Needless to say, when those issues cost you chances at the Super Bowl, that approach does little to make anyone feel better. 

Filthy Rich Bisaccia - And here is just the latest example of being reactive. 19 years as a college coach, 19 years as a NFL coach. Is that a big enough difference from Mo Drayton to impress and satisfy you? Tom Silverstein reports that the Packers were prepared to make him the highest paid special teams coach in the NFL. So they reacted to the playoff disaster and spent a boatload of money on special teams. Do you feel better now?

Gah! The Pro Bowl - Anyone here watch the Pro Bowl? I accidentally happened upon it as I was looking for Olympics Curling (I'm hooked) and I swear I had the same reaction as when I accidentally happen on some Kardashians show. As in visceral disgust and hitting the "next channel" button multiple times in a panic.

 

 

Huh? - Speaking of Charles Woodson, he evidently said on Good Morning Football that if he's the Packers, he's thinking about trading Aaron Rodgers if he can. Not wrong, but I'm just surprised a Packers HOFer he would say that out loud in front of the world about a future Packers HOFer. 

__________________________

"Jersey Al" Bracco is the Editor-In-Chief, part owner and wearer of many hats for CheeseheadTV.com and PackersTalk.com. He is also a recovering Mason Crosby truther.  Follow Al on twitter at @JerseyalGBP

NFL Categories: 
12 points

Comments (143)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
jh9's picture

February 09, 2022 at 06:23 am

To me, the last two offensive series in the 49ers’ game felt different. I don’t think it had anything to do with MLF. I believe Aaron Rodgers had already given up on the game at that point and was looking to get out of the cold and Lambeau Field as soon as possible. The “Hail Mary” pass to Adams was Rodgers’ way of going through the motions. If Adams makes a miraculous catch between defenders, great. If not, ‘Get me the hell out of here.’

Aaron Rodgers could see Adams was double-covered. He knew another receiver would be open. Rodgers ignored the right play because he quit. He quit the game. He quit on his teammates. He quit on the fans.

I believed in Aaron Rodgers. Not anymore.

15 points
21
6
PeteK's picture

February 09, 2022 at 09:21 am

Reminds me of the 4th and 26 debacle vs the Eagles, when we got the ball back Favre just heaved it up for an INT.

6 points
6
0
Leatherhead's picture

February 09, 2022 at 03:39 pm

I would agree very much with that. We were still ahead after the 4th and 26 play, but Favre couldn’t move the ball and eventually he turned it over.

After the blocked punt, we were tied, but Rodgers couldn’t move the ball and SF managed to kick the winner. We never trailed in either game until the final play, and there was a lot of poor offense in the second half of both games.

Lots of similarities. After the Philly game, I never thought Favre would take a team to the Super Bowl, and I was right. And I don’t think Rodgers will either.

5 points
5
0
Bitternotsour's picture

February 10, 2022 at 09:33 am

Mike Sherman = MLF? Interesting concept.

1 points
1
0
TMac55's picture

February 10, 2022 at 03:24 pm

That's exactly what came to my mind when I watched that. I've still not forgiven Brett for giving up, which is what it looked like from my couch. Aaron appeared to have the same disease....Quit-itis.

2 points
2
0
Michael Nault's picture

February 09, 2022 at 09:42 am

Amen. I have said that a bunch. Take a bow.

6 points
6
0
White92's picture

February 09, 2022 at 06:49 pm

One of the more rediculous takes I've seen, congrats. Scary all the thumbs up, oy. The game was tied for God's sake. I get you are upset about the result, but to say Rodgers was giving up is insane

-2 points
3
5
MainePackFan's picture

February 09, 2022 at 07:20 pm

I watched the replay today after reading many of the derogatory posts here at CHTV. Sorry. I did not see what you saw. In all fairness, I don't hate Aaron Rodgers like many in here do.
I think the man plays his ass off for this organization. I think the man loves the Packers as much as I do. Did he have a great game.. no. Is he the reason the Packers lost? In my humble opinion, no.

Yes, I saw the plays he missed. Deguara on check downs twice. Going for Tae when he had Lazard open. All of that is true.

Also true is this one simple fact....Had the special teams been simply adequate the Packers win that game.
Only people who do not like Aaron Rodgers blame this loss on Aaron Rodgers.

1 points
5
4
Coldworld's picture

February 10, 2022 at 08:24 am

Of course ST were to blame for gifting 10 points or so. However, that doesn’t excuse an offensive performance like that either. To say, as you are, that if one thing is broken everything else should be deemed acceptable makes me hope you aren’t a doctor an engineer.

Rodgers wasn’t good. Had he been the result would have been different despite an execrable if predictable ST debacle. The only reason that this was close was an unexpectedly stellar defensive effort.

So while LaFleur deserves scrutiny (beyond responsibility for Drayton) and STs are directly culpable, none of this negates the fact that Rodgers failed to live up to reasonable expectations and did so in a way that is strikingly reminiscent of prior playoff exits. To claim otherwise is simply untenable.

5 points
6
1
MainePackFan's picture

February 10, 2022 at 12:26 pm

There is no doubt that Rodgers didn't have a good game, he admitted it. Had he played like an MVP HOF QB, there is a good chance he overcomes the horrible ST play.

However, saying that the Packers lost because of his play (as many in here have) is not true.

Likewise, if the ST's had not given up 10pts and the Packers won 13-6, should anyone say it was because of Rodgers. That would also not be true.

Criticizing Rodgers for not winning the game is fair, but the losing the game lies squarely on the special teams. To claim otherwise is simple untenable.

1 points
3
2
TMac55's picture

February 10, 2022 at 03:28 pm

I like ARod but....show me the trophy. Special teams, yes, disaster. But...we scored 10 points....7 of them in the first 5 minutes of the game. Unforgivable and a lot of that is on Aaron. The Rodgers I saw in 2010 was an all out gamer. I frankly have not seen that player for several years. Kinda sad. Ready for new blood.

2 points
2
0
Nate-1980's picture

February 11, 2022 at 04:58 pm

He also had twice the weapons at wr then not just Adams and a bunch of nobodies..

0 points
0
0
ricky's picture

February 09, 2022 at 06:48 am

What is especially frustrating about the Packers ST's debacle was that fans everywhere had seen the problem, and were screaming for the team to fix it. But instead, they constantly decided to go with cheaper selections. Same thing at middle linebacker. They at least hired a coach who is good, and have decided to pay for quality. This was the easier decision, as it doesn't impact the salary cap. But will they make a serious move to re-sign Campbell? And as far as Rodgers, people hate to read this, but he has become Favre, minus the interceptions. The fixation on one receiver during "crunch time". The off-season drama. The on-field hunger for "chunk plays" rather than moving the chains and being more patient. Rodgers was doing that at the start of the SF game. But when Lewis fumbled, it was as if a switch tripped in Rodgers, and he changed from patient to resigned. And suddenly, Adams was the lone target on the field. We saw the same thing happen in the TB game last year, so it's not as if this is something new. Instead, it's a pattern, and LaFleur is not going to be able to change him this late in his HOF career. Is Love the answer? Frankly, I'm doubtful. But then again, I had a lot of doubts about Rodger's durability early on. Those were ended when he played in Dallas, and almost rallied the team to a win on an injured foot. Hopefully, I'm wrong again. But if Rodgers does get traded, we'll soon find out whether Love is viable, and how good a coach LaFleur really is.

17 points
18
1
mrtundra's picture

February 09, 2022 at 08:20 am

I wonder how committed the Packers' FO is in getting an extension done for Campbell. I've seen reporting that suggests he may be lost to us, in FA. I mean, after years of struggling at the LB position, we finally get a guy who played that position lights out, and we couldn't keep him??? Get 'er done, fellas!

6 points
7
1
Coldworld's picture

February 09, 2022 at 08:50 am

Until the Rodgers situation is solidified, I doubt there is leeway to do much. We need to shed 45 million by March 18. To sign an out of contract player we need to shed 45 million plus the current year cap value of the new contract.

4 points
5
1
dobber's picture

February 09, 2022 at 09:33 am

"But will they make a serious move to re-sign Campbell? "

I think they'll talk, but remember that Campbell came in with very little fanfare as a late signee with a journeyman NFL pedigree. The only thing he really had over Christian Kirksey (and remember that general consensus was that Kirksey would be an upgrade) or other ILBs that they brought in by trade prior to that was a slightly better reputation for playing the pass.

They can't break the bank, and Campbell deserves to make his $$. I don't think this will dissuade management from continuing to dumpster dive for FA ILBs and draft them post round 5 to see if they can hit. If anything, they may view the difference as Joe Barry and how he schemed and used the position, and they may task him to turn any old lemon into lemonade.

4 points
5
1
Coldworld's picture

February 10, 2022 at 08:32 am

I’ve wondered how Kirksey would have fared with Barry in charge at times. I also have regretted that he wasn’t kept to play Barnes’ role. Barnes was wildly inconsistent while Kirksey played well at the end of the prior season in an ILB 2 role.

Personally, I hope that the Packers and Campbell both realize that they found the right man for the ideally tailored role. Sadly, I think the Rodgers situation may prevent us from moving in time to tie him up before free agency. If Rodgers returns I think we are going to be forced to go back to rookies and bargain hunting at ILB, regardless of what we might wish with respect to Campbell.

0 points
0
0
murf7777's picture

February 09, 2022 at 06:56 am

Packers certainly were reactive about the ST hire after it cost them a chance to advance. It has been an obvious need for a few years now. Was that MLF’s fault or the upper mgmt being cheap? I would say the latter. Regarding, getting the first down vs trying to make the big play on a 3rd down, I’d say that is on Rodgers and that is the big difference between him and Brady. Once again, I don’t put that blame onto MLF.

We are very fortunate to have MLF and he has proven to be a high level coach in the NFL. There are 20+ teams that would hire him in a nanosecond if the Packers were to get rid of him. Is he perfect, nah, nobody is thou!

The one play that sticks into my craw is when Arod threw into double coverage to try and convert with Adams when Lazards was wide open 15 yards downfield running across the middle. Rodgers had to see him because he basically threw right over his head to get to Adams.

15 points
17
2
Razer's picture

February 09, 2022 at 08:20 am

...Was that MLF’s fault or the upper mgmt being cheap? I would say the latter...

While I agree that the FO could do a better job of stocking ST with "smart football players", I would say that it is the job of the head coach to manage the coaches. On my standard broadcast feed, I watched Tyler Lancaster on the LOS for field goals use the scarecrow approach to blocking and get run around repeatedly. LaFleur needed to step-in when these repeated and obvious failures were not going away. LaFleur's inexperience shows and when Rodgers is gone we will truly see what we have in MLF.

6 points
8
2
Coldworld's picture

February 09, 2022 at 10:16 am

I’ve said many times that we should be concerned about LaFleur. I understand that many people think Rodgers is mostly to blame. I suspect he does bear some of the responsibility, but I think by no means all.

Moreover, it’s ultimately the HC’s responsibility to deal with a QB who repeatedly goes off calls with bad results. If that were really the main issue, one would thing the HC would be ready to move on. LaFleur is clearly not keen to end the Rodgers era. From that I can only deduce that he doesn’t believe Rodgers is actually producing less than the calls justify or that he doesn’t believe he and his system could do better with another QB. Neither is a basis for encouragement. Indeed both are red flags for LaFleur.

Another problem I have with LaFleur is how he has handled Love. Redshirting all 2021 and then not having a game plan for him prepared when he did start or giving him time with the starting group in Detroit. That’s an odd way to develop any QB, and one thing is certain, at some point that will be critical.

If LaFleur is to succeed, I think he needs to have the crutch that is Rodgers removed. That may show him to be little more than a pretty face with a system (developed by others) or it may force him to trust himself. His apparent willingness to avoid that shouldn’t be and isn’t reassuring.

5 points
7
2
dobber's picture

February 09, 2022 at 12:48 pm

"If LaFleur is to succeed, I think he needs to have the crutch that is Rodgers removed."

Agree completely. I come back to the comparison with Favre. He really grew as a QB when he no longer had Sterling Sharpe to target on 2/3 of his attempts (exaggeration). LaF will be challenged to make things go and forced to use the creativity that seemed to disappear for long stretches this season.

5 points
6
1
flackcatcher's picture

February 09, 2022 at 02:31 pm

Totally agree CW. He knew Rodgers was not going to be cleared for the Chiefs game, and yet he threw Love out there without making the necessary adjustments. No excuse for the Lions, none. And his in-game adjustments on the offensive side, never happened. His handling of the Pettine situation was a bright red flag inside 1265. The question for Gutekunst is does he think Lafleur can take the next step a HC both on and off the field. His decision on Lafleur will determine the course the Packers take for the next decade.

4 points
5
1
jurp's picture

February 09, 2022 at 02:34 pm

Does Gute make that decision or is that Murphy? I have a hard time remembering who's responsible for whom in the FO.

1 points
1
0
Coldworld's picture

February 09, 2022 at 03:55 pm

I’m pretty sure it’s Murphy. Murphy hired him and bought into his vision, as Murphy put it.

1 points
1
0
flackcatcher's picture

February 10, 2022 at 01:58 pm

That is really the question here. It looks like the Executive Committee stripped Murphy of all over-site on the football side of the house after the midnight McCarthy firing. Gute has been the primary mover on all player and personnel decisions. But Lafleur is a gray area here. I agree with CW that the lack of transparency on this, and other issues hurts the Packers. The one clue is after Murphy hired Lafleur, the Executive Committee hauled Murphy before them to explain why they were not informed, and had Gute do a 'check six' on Lafleur. Under past Packer presidents, while the VP of football operations (Gutekunst) may recommend the head coaches dismissal, it is the Packer's President who makes the final decision. But with the power balance within 1265 shifted to VP of football operations, who knows?

1 points
1
0
HawkPacker's picture

February 09, 2022 at 08:36 am

'Was that MLF’s fault or the upper mgmt being cheap?'

murf, i think it was both. remember, it was mlf that hired menninga's assistant mo drayton. who would expect an assistant coach to do better than his predecessor? he was set up to fail right from the beginning and this was my thought when he was named st coach.

'We are very fortunate to have MLF and he has proven to be a high level coach in the NFL.' there was a time, not too long ago, when i would have agreed with you murf. however, i am slowly changing my mind and i can feel it in many of the comments that i see on ch tv. the first paragraph above is one reason. secondly, he appears slow to react to making changes during the game when things are not going our way, including half time. third, when things go wrong during the game or not like we would like to see them, he is good at accepting the blame but fails to correct the issues. case in point is when the offense is down inside the5 yard line, they would pass, pass, pass and not have dillon run the ball.

don't misunderstand, i like mlf but i can sense a change in direction of some of the fans, including myself.

1 points
4
3
croatpackfan's picture

February 09, 2022 at 09:10 am

I truly believe that the only, but major problem MLF had and has is his subservience to Aaron Rodgers. He has no balls to complain for Diva's stupidities. And he is willing to cover Aaron Rodgers miscues with taking blame for mistakes - for example his statement after divisional game was that Packers game plan was based on Davante Adams. I question that statement as it was looked like they game plan was only to use Davante Adams and nobody else. As Diva has influence on game plans (also taken from MLF statements) by adding some plays he wish/want to be inserted, And that is ridiculous. Packers should consult starter QB about the plan, but not let him to act as HC/OC/QBC. There is proverb in Croatia: "Lots of midwives, faintly baby!" That means nothing good will happen if you have to many authors of the product.

I only hope MLF will find his balls somewhere by the road and start to act like real HC. He will lose all credibility if he will not act properly, no matter who is his QB. Btw, can you imagine Bruce Ariens swallowing all those sh**s from anybody, including Aaron Rodgers.
Or, what Bill Belichik did when Tom Brady tried to influence on some decisions?

4 points
7
3
dobber's picture

February 09, 2022 at 09:38 am

"'We are very fortunate to have MLF and he has proven to be a high level coach in the NFL.' there was a time, not too long ago, when i would have agreed with you murf. however, i am slowly changing my mind"

The HC should be managing his team, and the OC should be calling plays, running the offense, and looking for those adjustments. I hate it when these young guys go into their first gig and can't stand to give up the playcalling on either side of the ball.

The in-game corrections and adjustments become far more systemic in that case. Why isn't Hackett--who needs to be watching what's being done play to play and advocating for changes--being given more blame? Hopefully Stenavich will be able to be a stronger presence in that way.

13 points
13
0
Razer's picture

February 09, 2022 at 09:53 am

...The HC should be managing his team, and the OC should be calling plays, running the offense, and looking for those adjustments. I hate it when these young guys go into their first gig and can't stand to give up the playcalling on either side of the ball...

Amen. Someone needed to tell Mo to, at least, count the players on the field.

6 points
6
0
dobber's picture

February 09, 2022 at 12:43 pm

He was wearing mittens by that time.

5 points
5
0
jannes bjornson's picture

February 09, 2022 at 11:48 am

Belichick has how many SBs in his back pocket? If I was an up and coming NFL coach, I would scrutinize his management techniques. He is involved in all Three Phases of his football team. Nothing is left unchallenged.

5 points
5
0
dobber's picture

February 09, 2022 at 12:45 pm

We keep coming back to Belichick. He's the enigma unicorn and a hard comparison for any to match, but also the gold standard. And this year he had one of the better teams in the league without Tawmy under C.

4 points
4
0
jannes bjornson's picture

February 09, 2022 at 02:24 pm

He learned it from Parcells

1 points
1
0
Bitternotsour's picture

February 10, 2022 at 09:47 am

Parcells never won when he didn't have Belichick running the defense. Parcells is in the hall because of BB.

2 points
2
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

February 10, 2022 at 02:11 am

Why isn't Hackett receiving more of the blame for the lack of in-game adjustments?

Damned if I know. In fact, he got rewarded.

4 points
5
1
Coldworld's picture

February 10, 2022 at 08:39 am

Player friendly coaches are in vogue right now, especially if they are good in front of the media. I remain a little surprised that Hackett was chosen. Of course, it is almost impossible for fans to know how big a contribution a non calling OC has and where that contribution lies most significantly.

Perhaps LaFleur doesn’t listen, but I am not clear how Hackett improved us this season, where I thought our game planning actually took a step back.

2 points
2
0
Packers1985's picture

February 09, 2022 at 12:14 pm

Yes would've seen Lazard open but I believe it's a knee jerk reaction for how our ST's messed up before that drive.
But Being a MVP and the highest paid guy on the team 12 should'nt have fallen for such emotions. He chocked it's as simple as that.

7 points
7
0
TomFisher's picture

February 09, 2022 at 07:22 am

Al, what would you have done different on the special team coaching hire front? Bisaccia has a boat load of experience as a special teams coordinator and a good track record. Sure is better than promoting from within,
Also, the tweet said first QB to do so
And the last play call was good, it did exactly what they were hoping for, pulling the safety deep to free up the middle for Lazard. Hero just paid no attention to it

7 points
9
2
Bitternotsour's picture

February 10, 2022 at 10:23 am

well. the mantra on players is "younger, faster, cheaper". Maybe the same thing for special team coaches?

as an option, i might have opted for youth and scheme over grizzled, overpriced, lifetime Raider. nonetheless, something had to be done.

2 points
2
0
stockholder's picture

February 09, 2022 at 07:42 am

We constantly see the refs change the outcome of the game. So it doesn't surprise me; the flack everyone is giving him for that play. So just say it Rodger haters. HE THREW THE GAME. Launch the investigation right now. Scandals are great. It will get more attention than the Olympics. If Woodson can come out of the wood work. Just think of the money and Law suits behind that. The FO is just to quiet on their intentions. The next pole should be about Adams.

-14 points
3
17
Bearmeat's picture

February 09, 2022 at 07:47 am

It truly is impressive how big of an idiot you are. Sorry/not sorry.

11 points
14
3
croatpackfan's picture

February 09, 2022 at 09:12 am

Bearmeat did you ment Sorry, but it was intentional!

1 points
2
1
Leatherhead's picture

February 09, 2022 at 03:43 pm

The Princess says we shouldn’t call people idiots if we disagree with them, even if they actually ARE idiots.

-1 points
0
1
13TimeChamps's picture

February 09, 2022 at 04:49 pm

So people who downvote you are "chickenshits", but calling people names while hiding behind the safety and anonymity of your computer apparently makes you a tough guy.

I would return the favor and call you out for the ass clown that you are, but that would just bring me down to your level.

1 points
3
2
dobber's picture

February 09, 2022 at 09:40 am

"We constantly see the refs change the outcome of the game."

Isn't the object to play well enough over four quarters so that one or two penalties or non-calls, or special teams gaffe(s), doesn't cost you the game?

12 points
12
0
jurp's picture

February 09, 2022 at 02:37 pm

I didn't actually see the fuckery from the refs in the playoffs that I expected to see. Seemed that they were doing a good job in all the games I watched.

2 points
3
1
jlc1's picture

February 10, 2022 at 09:23 am

Well there was the whistle in the LV-CIN game that should have stopped play resulted in a Cincy TD. The mistake was compounded when they let the play stand - and this was after review. So the league refs and the field refs made multiple, basic errors on a game changing play.

0 points
1
1
Leatherhead's picture

February 09, 2022 at 03:48 pm

That has been my point all along, Dobber. Bad calls and special teams screwups are part of the game, just like missed tackles or dropped passes. **it Happens. The object is to overcome adversity.

4 points
5
1
Oppy's picture

February 09, 2022 at 09:14 pm

For those CHTV readers who thought *I* was off my rocker:
I present to you, exhibit "A"

Stockholder, pull it together, man.
I don't know what kind of voices you're hearing, but lately you seem to have been arguing against statements nobody has been making.

And what's with the lawsuits?

Wellness check? Somebody?

1 points
2
1
jeremyjjbrown's picture

February 09, 2022 at 07:38 am

'two other receivers are open, one completely uncovered. But what burns me even more about that play is the call.'

Why are you burned about a play where two players are wide open? Sounds like a great call to me.

26 points
26
0
CJ Bauckham's picture

February 09, 2022 at 08:00 am

Seconded

7 points
7
0
jurp's picture

February 09, 2022 at 08:46 am

It wasn't the call, it was the execution by our QB.

17 points
17
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

February 09, 2022 at 11:46 am

I agree, but JA (who is usually spot on) hates the call.

0 points
0
0
JerseyAl's picture

February 09, 2022 at 09:54 pm

Because it's a critical pay in the game. I would value just getting the first down above all else there, which means I'm calling as high a percentage of success play as possible, as opposed to running deep routes when you know the pass rushers will have their ears pinned back going after Rodgers. The odds of completing a deep pass are much lower. I'm totally playing the percentages in that situation because it's a critical play that could be game-changing - and it was.

3 points
3
0
Coldworld's picture

February 10, 2022 at 08:44 am

Isn’t that football 101? When the game is on the line, style doesn’t count. First downs do. Take what they give you, play to the percentages has been the mantra in such situations since the dawn of the forward pass.

2 points
2
0
jurp's picture

February 10, 2022 at 12:56 pm

Exactly - it worked great for us at the end of the Ice Bowl. I know, I know, that was during the Days of the Dinosaurs, but some things really DO never change.

1 points
2
1
jeremyjjbrown's picture

February 10, 2022 at 10:44 am

It doesn't matter what you call if Rodgers doesn't do his reads correctly. The play call worked, Rodgers shit the bed.

3 points
3
0
Oppy's picture

February 09, 2022 at 09:18 pm

When the game hinges on moving the sticks and eating clock, on a single play..

maybe something with a few more higher-percentage routes is in order.
I believe that's what Al is getting at.

WIth that said, it sure looks like that play was designed to go to Lazard. If that's the case, it was the right play, and just horrible, horrible execution by Last Dance Rodgers.

6 points
6
0
Razer's picture

February 09, 2022 at 07:40 am

Like most of you, I didn't like the body language or energy of Rodgers in the final quarter of that game. It was as if he had no fight. The same old question lingers on whether the coaches are calling these plays or Rodgers is playing rouge. If only we had embraced more of a power game and actually used it to against a power team on our "frozen tundra". Piss me off!

I am getting a feeling that the Packers will try to keep there MVP QB and supporting cast together for another run. Hey, I like to win but I doubt that Rodgers will play with the coaching and I don't think his celebrity distraction will decrease. My gut tells me 'it is time'

16 points
16
0
jurp's picture

February 09, 2022 at 08:49 am

"I am getting a feeling that the Packers will try to keep there MVP QB and supporting cast together for another run."

If you're right, they'll "run" into the playoffs and a certain someone will shit the bed yet again—and then we'll be looking at 1979-1989 for the next 10 years.

5 points
6
1
croatpackfan's picture

February 09, 2022 at 09:13 am

"If you're right, they'll "run" into the playoffs and a certain someone will shit the bed yet again"

Be brave, tell us who will shit the bed, again, of course!

1 points
1
0
BirdDogUni's picture

February 12, 2022 at 10:13 am

The only thing we can hope for if AR comes back, is for the Packers to make another run, and our FO does a better job of keeping the band together than other FOs... Another year experience for MaLF and Love is not a bad thing.

We do have the ability to strengthen this team in the draft.

A new STs Coordinator should leave us without the debacles we've endured the last decade.

Other teams have some of the same tough cap decisions the Packers do, so if our FO does a better job than some of the other FOs, we might actually still be the best of the NFC.

The only problem is our future. If AR comes back, we don't benefit from trading him for a ton of picks...

Listen, if we run into the perfect storm and we end up in the Super Bowl against an aging, weaker AFC team, kinda like 2010 season, we can still win a Super Bowl. Maybe we don't get the #1 seed and play in warm weather climates and AR pulls off the "Last Tango..."

I think the smart play is to trade AR now, while his stock is higher than it will ever be, but I also know if AR does come back, we definitely have a shot to win it all.

2022-2023 Packers will no doubt be a different team, but if the FO does pull off bringing AR back, our Offense can get us to the playoffs for sure. Our Defense showed they can play much better under Barry than Pettine. With a decent STs Coordinator, STs shouldn't be a negative, at the very least. So while I still think we should trade AR, I know if we don't we still have a shot.

Our MVP just needs to play like it when it counts.

0 points
0
0
x24's picture

February 09, 2022 at 08:50 am

Isn't repeating the same exercise and expecting a different outcome a symptom of insanity?

I think we keep Rodgers OR we keep Adams. If both players are somehow retained, how can we expect a different outcome?

And if we ship them off as a package deal? Then so be it. Let them pad the record books for another club while carrying that team 9/10ths of the way there

12 points
12
0
Bearmeat's picture

February 09, 2022 at 07:47 am

I know that I'm unusual in this, but the 2021 playoff choke - just the latest in a loooooong line of January chokes for the Packers - didn't really bother me. I half expected it to happen vs the 49ers, who have owned us since Reggie left in 98. I thought that if it didn't happen vs SF, it would happen the following week. Point blank, the team in 2021 was a year too late. Running it back rarely works. 2020 was our year.

If the brain trust at 1265 is stupid enough not to maximize 12s value now, even though he absolutely is a playoff choker, then GB will deserve the 10 years of sucking ass that will come post 2022 or 2023, whenever 12 does retire.

I will still watch the games, because I'm a Packers fan. But I will hate every second of it.

17 points
20
3
jurp's picture

February 09, 2022 at 08:51 am

"I will still watch the games, because I'm a... fan. But I will hate every second of it."

Sounds like how a Vikings fan watches their games. I'm not calling YOU a Vikes' fan, Bearmeat, but it's sad to think that the FO is on the cusp of sucking all of the joy out of the team just like that crappy franchise's FO has done over the decades.

7 points
8
1
Bearmeat's picture

February 09, 2022 at 08:55 am

Yup

3 points
4
1
jannes bjornson's picture

February 09, 2022 at 11:53 am

Bingo !

1 points
1
0
Leatherhead's picture

February 09, 2022 at 03:55 pm

In two years, you’ve gone from “our receivers are garbage” to “our QB is a choker”

Welcome to the Dark Side. I applaud your change in perspective.

3 points
3
0
Oppy's picture

February 09, 2022 at 09:20 pm

Does that make me Emperor Palpatine?

2 points
2
0
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

February 10, 2022 at 09:17 am

Bearmeat,
I hear you! I'm in the same boat in that I will always be a Packer fan but should Rodgers stay it will be very difficult to enjoy watching them.

1 points
1
0
mrtundra's picture

February 09, 2022 at 08:15 am

Another thing about that 3rd and 11 play is that, quite often, I've seen plays where the WR goes 5 yards down the field, needing 11 yards to move the chains, and the QB passes to that WR and he has to fight for the extra 6 yards, after the catch, and usually comes up short. We need to develop plays, where the WRs know the yard to gain, and the play is designed to move the chains on a completion. Love should be made to see, and know, which WRs are, most likely open, on all plays. A quick release negates a sack/ pass rush and moves the chains for us. Rodgers did look like he did not want to be there, in the SF game, especially late in the game. Give Love the QB duties and the coaching he needs to succeed. Thanks to Rodgers for a brilliant, exciting career in GB. It's time to move on.

13 points
14
1
HawkPacker's picture

February 09, 2022 at 09:10 am

mrtundra, i whole heartedly agree. rodgers looked frozen up and wanted out of there. i remember favre in the latter stages of his career. he was the same way. at the time, i could not believe what i was seeing and now....rodgers is eerily similar. it may be time for him to go.....

8 points
8
0
Ya_tittle's picture

February 09, 2022 at 11:01 am

EXACTLY! I was at that championship game they lost to the Giants. Favre was so done that I wasn't mad when he hung it up a few months later.

6 points
6
0
dobber's picture

February 09, 2022 at 09:43 am

Sometimes he's the only open guy or the pressure is coming in hot, and you have to hope he can find the yards.

Guys need to make plays.

4 points
4
0
Leatherhead's picture

February 09, 2022 at 05:44 pm

Even if short of the sticks, I’d rather face 4th and 2 than 4th and 11.

6 points
6
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

February 10, 2022 at 02:26 am

THIS

I actually would suggest that AR is too interested in throwing the ball past the sticks. There is a lot to be said for a QB who gets the ball into the hands of his playmakers and lets them, you know, make plays. There was a QB in NE who was celebrated for doing just that.

4 points
4
0
Irish_Cheesehead's picture

February 09, 2022 at 11:53 am

I believe the receivers that were open on that play were past the first down marker, so they did know where to be in the field. Lazard would have had a huge YAC as well. Failure was in the QB, not the play design or the receivers.

10 points
10
0
Coldworld's picture

February 10, 2022 at 08:53 am

I agree with you all on that play. However, it wasn’t just that play. There were a number of prior examples that are strikingly similar. Had we taken those, that play might not have been necessary. Furthermore, had we learned from prior mistakes and kept a cool head (I think this is a key point), this play might have resulted in a first down by Lazard. Successful QBs adapt to in game events. In recent years, Rodgers seems to have lost that.

2 points
2
0
HawkPacker's picture

February 09, 2022 at 08:18 am

i would have to agree with charles as far as trading rodgers. i am a rodgers fan but believe it is now best for the packers to trade him...possibly to denver along with devantae adams if at all possible. hopefully in return we can get fant, one of their talented receivers, hopefully one of their defensive studs and draft capital.

we can then be able to sign campbell and douglas and extend the players we need to as well as have good draft capital to surround love with more good players and build our defense accordingly.

i know this is a wish and hopfully it will come true.

14 points
14
0
PeteK's picture

February 09, 2022 at 09:43 am

There is a chance that even with a mediocre QB, the defense, O line, and two good RBs could propel the team into the playoffs.

8 points
10
2
BirdDogUni's picture

February 09, 2022 at 03:58 pm

If, Love can follow directions and game plans, it's possible he hits the open receiver on 3rd and 11?

5 points
5
0
Coldworld's picture

February 09, 2022 at 08:36 am

I feel polluted of mind generally, but I will say that it’s better that the Packers have seemingly accepted that they needed an infusion of ideas and experience to STs than continuing denial. Happy? No. The horse has long bolted but less unhappy. That said, the lack of transparency Murphy has created means we can’t tell how this belated self-awareness came about and from whom. That’s not a good thing at all.

On rewatching that game I am of the opinion that Rodgers plus Adams is an unhealthy Union. I love watching Adams, but paying him without Rodgers is just not justifiable given where we are. Paying him with Rodgers is, however, not wise either. For many fans, myself included, I see that as a similar blind spot to the one the team has had with respect to STs.

For a while now the presence of Adams has tended to actually make Rodgers worse despite all the stats. It’s not Adams’ fault, but in terms of the team and Rodgers winning against good Ds in critical games it’s not healthy.

There is something wrong when we all agree that the plays are often inapposite but can’t tell if that’s primarily due to the caller or what the QB does but can agree that the outcome in key games is eerily similar failings. Who is in charge and who needs to change, because something does?

On Woodson: He’s one of the smartest HoF former players out there. I think he’s able to look at the big picture and willing to say what he thinks. I think he’s confident enough in his place in the world to believe that he can. Personally, that’s why I give his thoughts some attention, unlike those of many ex players.

14 points
15
1
jurp's picture

February 09, 2022 at 08:55 am

For the last couple of seasons I've seen Rodgers+Adams = Favre+Sterling Sharpe in the early 90s. After Sharpe went down with the weird neck injury, Favre's play became much better and the team began winning more. When Adams has been out, we've won every game because Mr. Mysterioso's safety blanket wasn't playing. Very similar situations and results.

If we keep AR (God forbid), then we'd be far, far better off without Adams, as much as I like him as a player.

12 points
13
1
PeteK's picture

February 09, 2022 at 09:59 am

I remember that 95 season fondly. It went from great disappointment in losing a great WR in 94 to elation the next season as the ball was spread around and Brooks, Chmura, and Levens came into their own. The SB in 96!

6 points
7
1
dobber's picture

February 09, 2022 at 12:53 pm

Didn't scroll down this far to see your Favre/Sharpe comment before I posted similar above.

Props to you for getting there first. Agree!

3 points
3
0
PeteK's picture

February 09, 2022 at 01:31 pm

Now if we could only agree on Patrick. hahaha

1 points
1
0
dobber's picture

February 09, 2022 at 01:41 pm

Kumbaya, mate! Kumbaya!

2 points
2
0
jurp's picture

February 09, 2022 at 02:41 pm

Great minds think alike :)

1 points
1
0
Alberta_Packer's picture

February 09, 2022 at 10:52 am

I have not waned in my thinking that the Packers should end this era and start afresh with a new one - with moving-on from Rodgers, Adams, Cobb et al. In fact, it would be tantamount to mismanagement, should the Packers brain trust not do so. Woodson's comments underlines the need for present and progressive action - not maintenance of the status quo.

14 points
14
0
x24's picture

February 09, 2022 at 11:14 am

Testify!

5 points
5
0
Swisch's picture

February 09, 2022 at 06:51 pm

The last play of the season for Aaron Rodgers in missing a wide-open Allen Lazard is one of the most awful blunders in playoff history for the Packers and the entire NFL.
I'm shocked that it has apparently received so little attention.
Why would the Packers, or any other team, want to have Rodgers as a leader until they found out why he didn't throw the ball to Lazard as he ran all alone across the field right in front of our quarterback?
Whether Rodgers didn't see Lazard, or just ignored him, it was horrible.
More so, is this part of a pattern for Rodgers? Does he not read the field all that well, and so routinely misses secondary receivers that are open? Or is he just so stubborn that he regularly forces the ball into double coverage when he has someone else running free with no coverage?
Either way, why would any team want this guy as their quarterback?

9 points
10
1
croatpackfan's picture

February 09, 2022 at 09:19 am

Swisch, that was not first time that Diva "didn't see" open Lazard. Remember last year NFCCG, when on 3rd & 8 Lazard was 1 yard out of end zone lone as unwilling child, but Diva threw to triple covered DA?

It is pattern, not mistake!

10 points
11
1
Swisch's picture

February 09, 2022 at 10:48 am

I think you're probably right, croatpackfan, that Rodgers is consistently unable or unwilling to hit open receivers when they're not his primary targets -- and perhaps especially in the biggest moments of the biggest games.
It seems a huge deficiency to me as far as Rodgers being a desirable quarterback in the NFL.
So, why is it that seemingly all of the sports reporters and commentators (except perhaps Jersey Al) are asking where Rodgers is going to end up playing next season with his huge ego for a humongous salary -- instead of asking why any general manager would want him?

5 points
5
0
jurp's picture

February 09, 2022 at 02:42 pm

Sssh. We don't WANT the reporters and commentators to ask that question - it'll mess up any trade we might be trying to make :)

4 points
4
0
jannes bjornson's picture

February 09, 2022 at 12:03 pm

What about the other two plays in that series?? Move the chains. Where was Taylor? A collective FU across the board. TWO Weeks to prep for this game. They knew the weather forecast. Lack of discipline,dedication, Desire. No SB 4 U....

5 points
5
0
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

February 10, 2022 at 09:25 am

Swisch,
Murphy once said Rodgers " is a complicated fellow".

Well known Rodgers was/is not happy about the Packer organization ".

Rodgers knew 2021 was his last season playing for the Packers. I think there could be many reasons for Rodgers poor performance in the 49's game, as well as why he chose not to throw to the wide open Lazard.

0 points
1
1
Since'61's picture

February 09, 2022 at 09:26 am

For me the 3rd and 11 to Adams was anti-climatic. In the previous drive Gary made the play of the game when he stopped the 49ers on their 4th and 1 try in Packers territory.
That play should have been the game winner.

That was Rodger’s Ice Bowl/Bart Starr moment. With about 6 minutes remaining a solid drive at that point ends the game especially if the drive results in a score. A TD makes it 17-3 and a FG makes it 13-3. More importantly a decent drive even with a few first downs and no score probably gets down to the 2 minute warning with the 49ers taking over deep in their own territory following a punt.

Instead Jones runs for 2 yards on 1st down. At this point I'm expecting a pass to Jones in space or a quick throw to a TE or Lazard to at least get to 3rd and short. Instead we get an incompletion to Adams on the boundary. 3rd down is a sack for minus 11. I'm not even looking directly at my TV screen when I hear the thump of a kick being blocked, I look up and say to myself "this will not end well."

Rodgers had another chance but the 3rd and 11 play did not surprise me. I don't who is calling the play but it doesn't matter, the execution was terrible on both of our last possessions especially by Rodgers in terms of his decision making. Any progress on the drive prior to the blocked punt and the game is over. The 49ers offense was not scoring a TD that day without a miracle which the Packers handed them because of their poor execution on offense.

The offense was fine until the Mercedes Lewis fumble. After that they never showed anything. There was unimaginative play calling and poor execution. No excuses, they wasted the best Packers defensive performance in a playoff game since the Lombardi era. Thanks, Since '61

19 points
19
0
Razer's picture

February 09, 2022 at 10:20 am

An accurate and sad recount of the end-of-game. This game was so "ours" for the taking. We absolutely gave this away.

9 points
9
0
Since'61's picture

February 09, 2022 at 10:50 am

Razer I appreciate your feedback. Yes, we did give the game away, or at least the offense and the STs did. What is so frustrating is that throughout most of the season the Packers found a way to win games. Then in the playoff game they found a few ways to lose the game.

It has happened to the Packers far too often going back into the post-Holmgren Favre era.

Now it is compounded by severe salary cap issues. As I've posted previously, I don't have a high level of confidence that the current triumvirate (Murphy/Gute/Ball) which created this mess are capable of successfully getting out of it. Stay well. Thanks, Since '61

7 points
8
1
Razer's picture

February 09, 2022 at 10:58 am

Always enjoy your insights. I haven't given up on Gutekunst and Ball yet. We knew that there would be a cost to making a run and they did add to the roster in a good way. More than anything this was a failure of leadership for both players and coaching.

7 points
7
0
Since'61's picture

February 09, 2022 at 12:45 pm

Razer I always enjoy your posts as well. I haven’t given up on Gute and Ball yet either. I agree that the results on the field are failures in leadership by coaches and players. Especially when it comes to situational football in the playoffs.

However Gute, Ball and very likely Murphy should be accountable for the current cap mess. If they work out of it great, but I’m concerned that they are driven by continuing to reach the playoffs every season rather than biting the bullet and moving into the future.

I think they’re concerned that if the Packers fall into a losing cycle, the Investment in Titletown becomes a “White Elephant” for the team and the town as tourists and casual fans no longer see Lambeau as a “destination”, especially during the off-season. Gute is tied to Love and I think Murphy is tied to the viability of Titletown. If true, then football decisions are driven for the wrong reasons.

It’s nothing more than the consultant in me trying to understand the motivations of senior management, in this case Murphy. Ultimately time will tell. Thanks, Since ‘61

3 points
3
0
jurp's picture

February 09, 2022 at 02:46 pm

I think the team would be better without Murphy - or at least, with Murphy responsible only for the Titletown district. We need new blood in that position and (as CW and others have said) a clearer, more transparent structure that the new blood will bring.

A fantasy - that we the fans create a fan-led movement to demand that Murphy's duties be curtailed as I said above and that we force it through this July. (A guy can dream, can't he?).

5 points
5
0
BirdDogUni's picture

February 09, 2022 at 04:46 pm

I gave up on Murphy a long time ago. I too believe the leadership of the Packers Franchise needs to be more in line with the Ron Wolf era... Knowing whose head to call for makes a difference... ; )

I have liked some of Gutey's draft picks and other's I've questioned... I've liked Ball handling the money, but I wish Mark Murphy would keep his mouth shut. SMH

Clearly defined roles would be better for everyone, and I don't think that will happen while Mark Murphy has control.

I'm sorry this isn't more coherent, I've been interrupted 5 times while writing it, so it's all over the place. Suffice it to say, I'm not a Mark Murphy fan. Period.

2 points
2
0
jannes bjornson's picture

February 09, 2022 at 12:20 pm

Precisely, time for a reset. Kleen Haus. From the Introduction of LaFleur as the HC with Murphy grandstanding @ the Press Conference the Silage committee was performing like Cold War bureaucrats. The Three-Year Plan has run its course. The Report: Epic Fail.

6 points
6
0
HawkPacker's picture

February 09, 2022 at 08:42 pm

Razer, sounds very similar to the prior year as well. we gave that one away too.

1 points
1
0
White92's picture

February 09, 2022 at 06:55 pm

Couldn't agree more

1 points
1
0
Tundraboy's picture

February 09, 2022 at 09:37 pm

And that is exactly what happened. The pain will not go away. Still can not believe it happened.

1 points
1
0
croatpackfan's picture

February 09, 2022 at 09:22 am

Al, I have to repeat myself. You are again on spot.

Only one observation - it seems that Charles Woodson is more Packers that still Packers Diva. He is thinking about the future of the franchise, not how to please the media or Diva. I can only say "kudos Charles" and that is why people like him. Honest, open and knowledgeable...

10 points
12
2
BAMABADGER's picture

February 09, 2022 at 09:41 am

If the FO and MLF spent money on a quality ST coach last year, Al would be writing about Packer Super Bowl matchups verses the Bengals.

1 points
4
3
PeteK's picture

February 09, 2022 at 10:16 am

However, a clutch MVP QB overcomes those glaring mistakes and capitalizes on what the defense gives him. Even with those ST mistakes the game was still ours to win or lose. Video does not lie, besides Lazard, Dequara was wide open on numerous plays with definite first downs. Ugly mystery

12 points
12
0
Razer's picture

February 09, 2022 at 10:53 am

...Ugly mystery...

So true. I hate to think that Rodgers' ego gets in front the team but repeated failures for such a smart and talented guy keeps playing out the same way. Maybe Rodgers look of defeat in the 4th quarter was his realization that 'his' gameplan wasn't working and he didn't know how to embrace the coaching plan. A total unnecessary failure.

8 points
8
0
13TimeChamps's picture

February 09, 2022 at 12:09 pm

Well...he is a complicated fella.

5 points
5
0
jannes bjornson's picture

February 09, 2022 at 12:18 pm

Q was no help for the mystic.

2 points
2
0
Razer's picture

February 09, 2022 at 12:24 pm

Too funny

0 points
0
0
BAMABADGER's picture

February 09, 2022 at 11:48 am

ST gave up 10 points not AR. Yes, AR had a poor second half. I have criticized Rodgers all season for forcing the ball to DA. Rodgers has overlooked a wide open Lazard all season... Deguara has hands of stone as he showed during the game. He would not be on the roster of the majority of NFL teams . The offense and defense played and got us the lead. The loss is the result of the HC and FO refusing to get the best players and coaches on the field. Most Packer supporters with football knowledge correctly predicted that ST coaching would eventually cost us in the playoffs or SB.

-4 points
1
5
Coldworld's picture

February 09, 2022 at 12:38 pm

STs cost us the game, but only because of a lights out performance from our D. Our O was ineffective after the first half of the first quarter. Our star player regressed, lost his cool, regurgitated the same self destructive reaction. As he did the prior year (prior 2 really). Rodgers did next to nothing positive for more than 3 quarters. Neither LaFleur’s or STs failings change that ugly fact.

Rodgers is paid on the premise that he can make enough plays to score more than 10 points. The whole roster is built in that assumption. He didn’t make the plays when it mattered this year or last year and he made the same errors. To ignore that is to delude oneself just as much as ignoring the effect of STs. The Packers seem to have accepted reality with respect to STs, I wish they and others would learn to see Rodgers in similarly unvarnished context too.

5 points
6
1
dobber's picture

February 09, 2022 at 01:01 pm

If SF has a better QB, the Packers lose that game 21-10 or so. Poorly placed passes, dropped balls, dumpoffs to WR/RB that had nowhere to go. Don't get me wrong, the Packers played a whale of a defensive game.

The SF offense was not good, though...
...and Garoppolo was not good...
...and the Packers still lost.

6 points
6
0
TXCHEESE's picture

February 09, 2022 at 10:25 am

I actually liked the call on the last play. Send Adams deep to pull the safety out and run a deep crossing. It worked as designed, but Mr. Rodgers again wanted to paint outside the lines to show everyone just how awesome he is.

Agree with with Mr. Woodson. Unless Rodgers is ready to tear up his contract and sign a team friendly deal that gives them the ability to keep the key FA's, then hard pass on keeping him.

11 points
11
0
Ya_tittle's picture

February 09, 2022 at 11:07 am

I agree that the PLAY CALL WORKED--but Rodgers execution ruined the play. Bill Bellichick says "Do your Job," and everyone on that play BUT Rodgers did their job. That's a fact. He was supposed to hit the wide open Lazard over the middle.

10 points
10
0
White92's picture

February 09, 2022 at 06:57 pm

He should play for league minimum

1 points
1
0
Minniman's picture

February 09, 2022 at 11:57 am

To Huh, or Not to Huh - that is the question!

The million dollar question that's been on my mind for 2 disappointing post-seasons now is exactly as you asked Al "who the heck was responsible for the offensive play-calling in the 4th" - and by that I mean the play that was actually executed?

Both times - the games were there to be won. Both times, abject 3-and-out capitulation.

I posted in the aftermath of the game that even my non-football loving wife asked "why the long ball to the covered man - when its sleeting, no less"........ she's the brains of the family!!

Someone has egregious judgement between MLF\Hackett\Rodgers.

If for some reason Rodgers stays, then that pretty much assures that Adams is gone. In that situation, I'm actually starting to think that that isn't a bad thing.

In reality, and as many more wizened here have laid out, Rodgers has to go. The combo officially has the 'yips' in post-season crunch time situations.

5 points
5
0
Packers0808's picture

February 09, 2022 at 12:19 pm

Maybe with the running game we have it is time to defensive minded a bit and keep the 'D" quarterback over the "O" quarterback. I agree with poster above Rodgers has become a quitter to a large extend and needs to be gone and start over at that position!

3 points
3
0
Packers1985's picture

February 09, 2022 at 01:01 pm

If we keep the blame game aside. I think our FO should learn something from the Ram's organization on what going all in meant. They signed their star players for some big contracts and did a blockbuster trade for stafford and then acquired mid season trades like von miller and OBJ even if they did'nt needed a WR at that time.
It all paid off for them they made sure there are no leaks left in any phase of their game i.e, offense defense and the special teams.

3 points
3
0
dobber's picture

February 09, 2022 at 01:48 pm

The Rams have let some guys walk. They've shed some contracts. They're -$8M on their cap. Their reckoning is coming, yet.

The Rams are leaky, too. Their defense can be had. They don't run the ball all that well. Stafford will throw the ball away a couple times per game. Thankfully for them, they're playing a team that profiles similarly in many aspects. It should be a good game to watch.

4 points
4
0
TXCHEESE's picture

February 09, 2022 at 04:14 pm

A sure interception thrown up by Stafford that was dropped by SF, and a wet the bed 4th quarter by the Packers are the only reasons the Rams are in the Super Bowl. If my memory serves me correctly, the Packers did make a run a OBJ, and I for one, am thankful they didn't get him. He's a talent, but lack of talent at the the WR position was not the problem. Throwing the ball to the open man was the problem for the Packers.

5 points
6
1
Qoojo's picture

February 09, 2022 at 12:24 pm

In the past few years, I think teams that can get pressure without blitzing cause Rodgers a lot of trouble. Rightly, so because there are more defenders in coverage. When he was younger, AR had a lot of success due to mobility, but his mobility is greatly reduced at this point. A lot of shoestring tackles on him when he tries to run.

I don't think AR gave up during the game. I think he has less confidence to escape the pocket and run. Then due to the pressure, he feels like he has less time. Mentally, he feels rushed, and he doesn't want to take a sack, so he focuses on his highest percentage target before the play starts. To me, he just looks confused like he cannot solve the defense and be awesome. Then he forgets WR target progression or whatever. The TB game was the same thing in second half, just looked confused.

7 points
7
0
Razer's picture

February 09, 2022 at 12:34 pm

...he forgets WR target progression or whatever. The TB game was the same thing in second half, just looked confused...

You bring up a good point. It may be the most compelling argument for Rodgers to embrace a system rather than rely on his past improvised game. He had enough team to beat the 49ers - if he chose to use them.

3 points
3
0
Jordan's picture

February 09, 2022 at 04:30 pm

Here’s something else to think about. The packers defeated the Steelers 31-25 in super bowl XLV. Rodgers and the offense didn’t score 31 points. They scored 24 points. If not for a nick collins defensive TD, the final score would have been 25-24 Steelers win.

2 points
3
1
barutanseijin's picture

February 09, 2022 at 05:28 pm

Two weeks earlier, the offense scored only 14 against the Bears. That wouldn’t have been good enough, but BJ Raji was the difference.

2 points
2
0
relleum61's picture

February 09, 2022 at 01:26 pm

Jimmy G, Matt Ryan and Jared Goff have made the Super Bowl with this system of offense. Why...because they had good teams around them and they did not get locked in on one receiver. If starting, by the end of next year Love has a good chance to be good enough in this system to make the playoffs...if he is surrounded with a good team. The running game is there, the o-line is there, hopefully the defense continues its upward swing...special teams can't get worse. It is time to transition.

4 points
5
1
relleum61's picture

February 09, 2022 at 01:26 pm

Jimmy G, Matt Ryan and Jared Goff have made the Super Bowl with this system of offense. Why...because they had good teams around them and they did not get locked in on one receiver. If starting, by the end of next year Love has a good chance to be good enough in this system to make the playoffs...if he is surrounded with a good team. The running game is there, the o-line is there, hopefully the defense continues its upward swing...special teams can't get worse. It is time to transition.

1 points
2
1
Archie's picture

February 09, 2022 at 02:28 pm

So Packers finally decide to pay top dollar for a ST coach. Too bad MM wasn't willing to do so at start MLF era - we'd probably be in SB now.

What does this signing tell me? It tells me that GBP intend to go all in one more time w Rodgers. Otherwise why bother with a ST coach that will be here one year only???

Also, why didn't we up the ante for OBJ? We had a few more million we could have thrown at him but we lowballed him too. Was that Russ "low-Ball" or MM again? We will never know but it makes no sense in retrospect. A quality ST coach or OBJ or both could have made all the difference. Too bad, it wasted a great year by Gutey.

-2 points
2
4
packer132's picture

February 09, 2022 at 09:45 pm

It was stated several times by Packers reporters and others that Green Bay could only offer the vet minimum for OBJ. There were no "millions"
in the bank. Wasted year? It sure is not on Gute, as he brought in Douglas and Campbell. The loss to the 49ers is on LaFleur, Rodgers, and special teams. I'm happy for you to have the inside scoop that Bisaccia only has one year as ST coach. What else does your crystal ball tell you?

4 points
4
0
Roadrunner23's picture

February 09, 2022 at 04:59 pm

Al you are so spot on!
The last proactive era we had was the Mike Holmgren era (which ended way too soon).

Ever since Packers coaches have either hung on to bad assistant coaches way too long.

Or have been so focused on hiring from within that they have sabotaged themselves!

The Packers have had the players to make it to multiple Super Bowls but poor coaching choices have doomed them.

Hire qualified coaches regardless of race, favoritism, hiring from within cultures or price.

Sometimes head coaches fall in love with their own coaches just like GM’s fall in love with players, so they’re deficiencies are masked over.

-1 points
1
2
HarryHodag's picture

February 09, 2022 at 05:37 pm

Jersey Al brings up, correctly, Rodgers and the deep ball near the end of the game to Adams.

I think this has something to do with what has appeared to be a season long capitulation to the desires of Aaron Rodgers. Rodgers zeroed in on Adams almost the entire game. Yes, there were reserves playing in some receiver positions and Rodgers is big on 'trust'. Lazard was wide open for what could have been a touchdown. But Rodgers has not been criticized much for a deep pass to Adams that all but ended the season. The 49'ers defense surely saw the same trend. Any other coach in the NFL would have torn Rodgers a new one when he came to the sidelines. I just get the feeling that the Packers are so gun shy of losing Rodgers they've largely given him the keys to the car to do whatever he wants without ramifications.

All us old timers remember the down years in Green Bay. But within that pod of time there were a couple of good QB's, Lynn Dickey and Don Majkowski come to mind. But those players stayed within the game plan and didn't say, "it's my way or tough" to the team.

As much as Rodgers has been the focal point of the Packers success has he become the talented but really troublesome employee who thinks he runs the show? As much as it will hurt short term, it is time to part ways with AR for a number of reasons.

10 points
11
1
BirdDogUni's picture

February 09, 2022 at 06:43 pm

Charles Woodson always struck me as a very intelligent man. Even when he was young. If he's smart enough to see we should trade Rodgers, that makes me hope beyond reason that Mark Murphy, Gutey, and Ball can see it too.

If we don't trade AR, I suspect those who are saying MM, Gutey, & Ball are just trying to keep their jobs are right, and if we as a franchise don't take advantage ARs trade value being higher than it will ever be, not only will we lose out possible compensation, but we'll be in an even deeper hole as a franchise.

Too bad we don't have a checks and balance system on MM, Gutey, and Ball...

2 points
3
1
Coldworld's picture

February 09, 2022 at 06:59 pm

Or even know who is responsible for what.

2 points
2
0
BirdDogUni's picture

February 10, 2022 at 12:02 am

Keep it cloudy so nobody knows who to blame...

Great gig if you can get it...

2 points
2
0
Coldworld's picture

February 10, 2022 at 09:04 am

Which is eloquent testimony as to the failure of the Board/Executive Board essentially all selected by Murphy. This is a governance issue that I think should be viewed as negligent oversight by the Board members.

3 points
3
0
BruceC1960's picture

February 09, 2022 at 09:07 pm

Well said.

1 points
1
0
Oppy's picture

February 09, 2022 at 09:24 pm

Re: Woodson publicly stating if he's the GM, he's thinking trade::

1) Woodson is a smart man, and he's able to separate his feelings and put himself in another's position with clarity and thoughtfulness.

2) Woodson always respected Rodgers' talent, but if you paid attention over the years, he was another of a long line of Packers players who have always danced around questions about Rodgers' leadership and character. I believe he was a fan of Rodgers' talent, but not at all a fan of how Rodgers handles his business around 1225.

7 points
7
0
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

February 10, 2022 at 09:35 am

Always impressed with the football knowledge of posters here at CCTV. Having the foresight to be able to see past Rodgers and what is best for the Packers I know isn't easy to do objectively after 17 years of greatness. It's time and has to be done...NOW!

2 points
2
0
jlc1's picture

February 10, 2022 at 02:36 pm

The O did not play well. Neither did SF's. Both D's played well. On the scoreboard our O and D outplayed theirs. That leaves ST responsible for the final score. Missing some passes is understandable. Blocked kicks are not.

2 points
2
0