Packers Lions Post Game

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

6 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

I don't.  Last year, the trio of Adams, Nelson, and Cobb played in the 70% range.  Granted all of them missed at least a game or two, but they also didn't have any real young talent behind them.  I'd imagine Cobb and Allison come in that 60-70% range, but Cobb is going to see his PT cut if he continues with this drops.

I went into the season thinking there were too many question marks, and too many rookies needing to contribute for this to be a year where we realistically could be expected to compete for the super bowl.  To me this was a year to get the new talent and get them experience, so if Gute can patch more holes and get more talent this off season we would be back to being a legitimate super bowl contender.

Given that I am more than willing to tolerate mistakes by the rookies.  It will help everybody.  competition for reps may increase the focus of the gys looking for contracts next year, an rotating WR's could stress defensive backs who are constantly on a fresh guy who plays with a different technique.

This season will hinge on development of young guys, and health of the team in general, so if we suffer from a few rookie mistakes along the way, so be it.  JMO

[CWood21]

1 minute ago, Ragnar Danneskjold said:

I went into the season thinking there were too many question marks, and too many rookies needing to contribute for this to be a year where we realistically could be expected to compete for the super bowl.  To me this was a year to get the new talent and get them experience, so if Gute can patch more holes and get more talent this off season we would be back to being a legitimate super bowl contender.

Given that I am more than willing to tolerate mistakes by the rookies.  It will help everybody.  competition for reps may increase the focus of the gys looking for contracts next year, an rotating WR's could stress defensive backs who are constantly on a fresh guy who plays with a different technique.

This season will hinge on development of young guys, and health of the team in general, so if we suffer from a few rookie mistakes along the way, so be it.  JMO

It's absolutely mind boggling to me that we literally see the Packers kill themselves with mistakes last night and still advocate for the young players, who are bound to have those rookie mistakes.  I mean, I get the idea of getting them reps to hopefully help develop them, but they're going to have rookie mistakes and we need to minimize those mistakes.  Obviously, Randall Cobb isn't making this any easier with the number of drops he's had.  And I think a LOT of it has to do where we are sitting a few weeks.  After the bye, we've got a reasonably difficult schedule with 3 of our next 4 being road games against the Rams, Patriots, and Seahawks.  If we come out of those games with 3 losses, you're more inclined to play your young players.

[Leader]

22 minutes ago, TheOnlyThing said:

And not just "really solid" play.

Both ESB and MVS flashed some athleticism that has sorely lacking at WR for years now.

Gute may have been on to something by injecting youth into the Pack's WR corps.

I more than welcomed the talent infusion at the position - it was sorely needed - and I'm hoping the FOs targeted talent evaluations were on target and we''ve got ourselves some decent talents. I've liked what I've seen so far from MVS. Perfect? No he's not been - but he has raw talent we can use - and EQ has measurables that we've not had as WR for some time - all he needs is some field time to figure things out at this level.

[Leader]

3 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

It's absolutely mind boggling to me that we literally see the Packers kill themselves with mistakes last night and still advocate for the young players, who are bound to have those rookie mistakes.  I mean, I get the idea of getting them reps to hopefully help develop them, but they're going to have rookie mistakes and we need to minimize those mistakes.  Obviously, Randall Cobb isn't making this any easier with the number of drops he's had.  And I think a LOT of it has to do where we are sitting a few weeks.  After the bye, we've got a reasonably difficult schedule with 3 of our next 4 being road games against the Rams, Patriots, and Seahawks.  If we come out of those games with 3 losses, you're more inclined to play your young players.

I'm not advocating sitting a healthy Cobb and Allison - but we should mix the rookies in IMO. Diversify our attack.

[skibrett15]

Right now I'm seeing a trend of Rodgers being not as accurate and way too zippy on throws over the middle.  Receivers cannot catch balls in stride and make plays after the catch.  Frequently we see poor ball placement leading to receivers diving or sliding or reaching back for the ball, and also a relatively high drop rate.  Possibly this is because these are receivers not in the exact windows at the right time, and possibly it's just poor ball placement or throws which are way too strong to corral safely while on the move.

You don't see this as often with Adams, where the connection is very strong.  With Graham the tendency does seem to be to throw at a LB's back and toss it up there, which is a different type of play altogether.  Mostly referring to the deep ins/digs and the slant crossers as well as a few outside breaking routes where the ball placement is VERY safe, to the point where the receiver is being led out of bounds.

[Kenrik]

19 minutes ago, Ragnar Danneskjold said:

As an add on to your comment, Pettine pretty much said he looks to the interior to get pressure.

The pressure is there.  That is how a guy like Blake Martinez quietly gets credit for 2 sacks yesterday.  They are not flashy, splash plays, but it has been effective.

seems like a lot of fans can't come to grips with this being a different defense than what it has been for the last 9 years.

I think you're spot on here. 6.5 out of 15 sacks from the OLB position. Interior pressure is the key to this defense. I just wish we didnt so much $ allocated to OLB.

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

5 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

It's absolutely mind boggling to me that we literally see the Packers kill themselves with mistakes last night and still advocate for the young players, who are bound to have those rookie mistakes.  I mean, I get the idea of getting them reps to hopefully help develop them, but they're going to have rookie mistakes and we need to minimize those mistakes.  Obviously, Randall Cobb isn't making this any easier with the number of drops he's had.  And I think a LOT of it has to do where we are sitting a few weeks.  After the bye, we've got a reasonably difficult schedule with 3 of our next 4 being road games against the Rams, Patriots, and Seahawks.  If we come out of those games with 3 losses, you're more inclined to play your young players.

But realistically, did we lose because of the rookie mistakes?  

I thought it was a bad call on the first Detroit punt, but King shouldn't have been there with Tramon waiving it off- that was 7 points.

Crosby's field goals may have been longer than necessary due to the offense bogging down, but even if he mad only half and the extra point -7 points.

you can argue that Aaron isn't holding the ball long enough for Detroit to get the sack/fumble if the vets are playing, but part of that is on him by not just throwing it away to live to fight another day and give the defense a better opportunity to get a stop.

I don't think anyone is advocating for benching the starters, but if you get a lead on SanFrancisco, why wouldn't you give the vets some plays off to give the rookies more work.  Had we done that with Buffalo, maybe you have Allison for last week.   More experience may help if someone gets injured later as well.

[CWood21]

7 minutes ago, Ragnar Danneskjold said:

But realistically, did we lose because of the rookie mistakes?  

I thought it was a bad call on the first Detroit punt, but King shouldn't have been there with Tramon waiving it off- that was 7 points.

Crosby's field goals may have been longer than necessary due to the offense bogging down, but even if he mad only half and the extra point -7 points.

you can argue that Aaron isn't holding the ball long enough for Detroit to get the sack/fumble if the vets are playing, but part of that is on him by not just throwing it away to live to fight another day and give the defense a better opportunity to get a stop.

I don't think anyone is advocating for benching the starters, but if you get a lead on SanFrancisco, why wouldn't you give the vets some plays off to give the rookies more work.  Had we done that with Buffalo, maybe you have Allison for last week.   More experience may help if someone gets injured later as well.

In this particular game?  No.  But LIS, we saw enough rookie mistakes the last two games with MVS between only getting one foot down, his lack of effort that led to a near pick-six, etc.  The more snaps they get, the more likely they are to to have those mistakes.

[skibrett15]

5 minutes ago, Ragnar Danneskjold said:

But realistically, did we lose because of the rookie mistakes?  

I thought it was a bad call on the first Detroit punt, but King shouldn't have been there with Tramon waiving it off- that was 7 points.

Crosby's field goals may have been longer than necessary due to the offense bogging down, but even if he mad only half and the extra point -7 points.

you can argue that Aaron isn't holding the ball long enough for Detroit to get the sack/fumble if the vets are playing, but part of that is on him by not just throwing it away to live to fight another day and give the defense a better opportunity to get a stop.

I don't think anyone is advocating for benching the starters, but if you get a lead on SanFrancisco, why wouldn't you give the vets some plays off to give the rookies more work.  Had we done that with Buffalo, maybe you have Allison for last week.   More experience may help if someone gets injured later as well.

His point is that those types of mistakes are USUALLY made more often by younger players.  In last week's game they were not, but that going forward it's young players who are most likely to make mental errors.

The fact of the matter is you have to consider the trade-off.  If their increased talent creates bigger and more frequent opportunities to score, you have created more margin for error in the first place.  Cobb and Allison have to be perfect and in sync.  MVS and Eq might have to just be "ok" to get open and get the ball.

It's a young player's game, and I think the rookies earned a few more reps.  Nothing drastic.

[AlexGreen#20]

15 minutes ago, skibrett15 said:

Right now I'm seeing a trend of Rodgers being not as accurate and way too zippy on throws over the middle.  Receivers cannot catch balls in stride and make plays after the catch.  Frequently we see poor ball placement leading to receivers diving or sliding or reaching back for the ball, and also a relatively high drop rate.  Possibly this is because these are receivers not in the exact windows at the right time, and possibly it's just poor ball placement or throws which are way too strong to corral safely while on the move.

You don't see this as often with Adams, where the connection is very strong.  With Graham the tendency does seem to be to throw at a LB's back and toss it up there, which is a different type of play altogether.  Mostly referring to the deep ins/digs and the slant crossers as well as a few outside breaking routes where the ball placement is VERY safe, to the point where the receiver is being led out of bounds.

Couldn't agree with this any more.

We're not getting Aaron Rodgers ball placement. We're getting Brian Hoyer ball placement. 

[CWood21]

Just now, AlexGreen#20 said:

Couldn't agree with this any more.

We're not getting Aaron Rodgers ball placement. We're getting Brandon Hoyer ball placement. 

Brian Hoyer?

[AlexGreen#20]

1 minute ago, CWood21 said:

Brian Hoyer?

Yes, this Monday thing is a racket. 

I meant more like, Brian Hoyer balls are usually catchable, but there's always some bad adjustment the receiver has to make that kills YAC. 

[MacReady]

29 minutes ago, TheBitzMan said:

This is a WOW play from a rookie. Great route, changes direction on a dime and splits the defenders with speed. Rodgers has a little pep in his step afterwards as well. Also drew a long PI on another double move which would have been a TD. His route running was impressive in this game. 

ESB did the same thing in a preseason game and a few people scoffed it off as nothing.  I really am shocked by how good ESB and MVS look.  Moore I'm not so thrilled about. 

[CWood21]

1 minute ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Yes, this Monday thing is a racket. 

I meant more like, Brian Hoyer balls are usually catchable, but there's always some bad adjustment the receiver has to make that kills YAC. 

Didn't know if that was intentional or just a mental gaffe.

[AlexGreen#20]

Just now, Outpost31 said:

ESB did the same thing in a preseason game and a few people scoffed it off as nothing.  I really am shocked by how good ESB and MVS look.  Moore I'm not so thrilled about. 

Moore was never thought to be pro ready.

Granted, neither was MVS. But that's not entirely an apples to apples comparison with MVS not being on many radars.