POST GAME GB at MIN week 12 (24-17 Loss, 4-6-1)

[CWood21]

5 minutes ago, Arthur Penske said:

Calling on more than 1 snap for your most athletic TE with Graham out is insane love and implying he's a future stud? Ok.

The argument I've made is that he's done nothing outside of that TD on a busted coverage to show he's worth giving any more snaps to.  We're clearly still in the "competing for a playoff" mentality, and if/when we get eliminated I'm all aboard the giving Tonyan snaps to see what we have.  But the reality is that Kendricks and Lewis are going to be more productive today than Tonyan.

[MacReady]

Just now, Howler said:

"I just see, offensively, a lack of creativity," Harrison said. "As a defensive player, nobody is afraid. I wouldn't be afraid of this offense. They don't make you think, they don't make you adjust, and the only thing really exotic about their offense is Aaron Rodgers running around, scrambling and making incredible throws down the field."

Added Dungy: "I'm going to go one step above that to the front office. They have not replaced their passing game—their receivers—with star players. They have Rodgers; he's one of the three best players in the league. When we had Peyton Manning, we stocked it up, always. Reggie Wayne, Dallas Clark, Joseph Addai, Brandon Stokley—make sure you get him stars. They only have one big-time player and that's Davante Adams."

Tony Dungy's got it.  There were no problems with this scheme, and there wouldn't be, if Rodgers either trusted his talented but inexperienced receivers or if he had some better weapons. 

 

[Packerraymond]

32 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

This insane Tonyan love needs to stop.  He's had one big play on a busted coverage, and suddenly he's a future stud.  Why?

Seasons over, he has potential. No reason to play the retreads ahead of him. See what he's got.

[CWood21]

4 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

Seasons over, he has potential. No reason to play the retreads ahead of him. See what he's got.

At this point, I'd agree.  Going into last night?  No.

[Golfman]

12 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

Lol.  Rodgers must be 37 by this logic.  If he's 34 by your weird calculations and playing as well as a 29-year-old right tackle, he'll be 35 next year and able to play like a 30-year-old right tackle. 

I'm not slow on the uptake, I know exactly what you're saying.  Your uptake is stupid and makes no sense. 

Yeah, clearly the QB position is relatable to the offensive line. Sorry, I'm patience for stupid has run out. Have a good day. 

[vegas492]

23 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

You don't pay Jimmy Graham $10M/year to be a complimentary TE, unless you expect Mac to suddenly starting running more 2 TE looks you're taking him off the field in favor of Tonyan.  That isn't happening.  LIS, I'm not advocating giving up on him, but there's nothing there that discourages me from looking to add a player or two this offseason.  And even less that really instills any level of confidence in him.

Woa, CWood21, my bad.  I meant Tonyan as a compliment to Graham, not the other way around.  I'd use Tonyan as we use Kendricks now, movement tight end.  Maybe, maybe he can slide to a Graham role in 2 or 3 more years.  

[CWood21]

Just now, vegas492 said:

Woa, CWood21, my bad.  I meant Tonyan as a compliment to Graham, not the other way around.  I'd use Tonyan as we use Kendricks now, movement tight end.  Maybe, maybe he can slide to a Graham role in 2 or 3 more years.  

And given where we are with a 3% chance of making the playoffs, I would agree.  But again, going into last night's game the Packers were better off with Kendricks/Lewis than Tonyan even if they don't offer that upside.

[MacReady]

Just now, Golfman said:

Yeah, clearly the QB position is relatable to the offensive line. Sorry, I'm patience for stupid has run out. Have a good day. 

You don't have to be sorry for being patience for stupid has run out.  You have a good day as well. 

[vegas492]

Just now, CWood21 said:

And given where we are with a 3% chance of making the playoffs, I would agree.  But again, going into last night's game the Packers were better off with Kendricks/Lewis than Tonyan even if they don't offer that upside.

I agree with that.  I didn't have any issue with how the tight ends were deployed last night.  

[LacyIsGood]

I wouldn't fire MM now because I think there is a real chance the Browns would trade for him.  If they did, I would promote Zook for the lolz, and to see what kind of intensity a former college HC brings.

Rodgers' play is very concerning.  Not just the misses, but this ridiculously high barrier of trust to give a guy a pass is so weird.  It's uninspiring, and hurts the growth of young players.  If this level of trust is necessary for being good...how can Matt Barkley come off the street after not playing for 2 years, go on the road with no weapons, and drop 41 on a respectable defense?  If anything, with the NFL being more and more match-up driven, and player trades increasing, the barrier to jump in and produce for a team is dropping.  The Packers offense is way on the other end of the spectrum.  

[Acrid Josher]

1 hour ago, Golfman said:

We need someone who is going to tell Rodgers this is how it is going to be, unequivocally. That ship sailed for McCarthy a long time ago. 

Assuming for a moment that we even want this (that Rodgers is even capable of becoming an entirely different QB from the sort he's made himself over his entire career and still being elite):

1. Do we really think there is any coach in the NFL that Rodgers is suddenly going to remake himself for if McCarthy isn't that guy?
2. If so, who is that guy?
3. Is that guy available to coach next year?

I think the answers to those questions aren't going to yield the solution fans are hoping for.

I think the entire approach to 'fixing' a very smart, very set-in-his-ways formerly MVP veteran like Rodgers isn't though enforcing an authoritarian top-down coaching solution. If you do that your QB likely rebels and you're forced to try a different solution or double down and claim you are OK with moving on from your QB.

It's important to keep in mind the personalities involved. I think there are probably coaches out there that can better use the talents Rodgers still has and 'fix' some of the problems his aging game is manifesting, but it's got to be someone that can give and take. That is, btw, why I'm dubious on someone like Jim Harbaugh because his strength seems to be in a more "my way or the highway" approach that works better for less experienced younger players who aren't as set in their ways- not a 2-time-MVP with a big ego who has an entire career worth of experience with what he likes to do.

[Golfman]

1 minute ago, LacyIsGood said:

I wouldn't fire MM now because I think there is a real chance the Browns would trade for him.  If they did, I would promote Zook for the lolz, and to see what kind of intensity a former college HC brings.

Rodgers' play is very concerning.  Not just the misses, but this ridiculously high barrier of trust to give a guy a pass is so weird.  It's uninspiring, and hurts the growth of young players.  If this level of trust is necessary for being good...how can Matt Barkley come off the street after not playing for 2 years, go on the road with no weapons, and drop 41 on a respectable defense?  If anything, with the NFL being more and more match-up driven, and player trades increasing, the barrier to jump in and produce for a team is dropping.  The Packers offense is way on the other end of the spectrum.  

This is actually possible! It is possible someone would give up a draft pick for McCarthy. 

[Norm]

3 minutes ago, Acrid Josher said:

Assuming for a moment that we even want this (that Rodgers is even capable of becoming an entirely different QB from the sort he's made himself over his entire career and still being elite):

1. Do we really think there is any coach in the NFL that Rodgers is suddenly going to remake himself for if McCarthy isn't that guy?
2. If so, who is that guy?
3. Is that guy available to coach next year?

I think the answers to those question sare't going to yield the solution fans are hoping for.

I think the entire approach to 'fixing' a very smart, very set-in-his-ways formerly MVP veteran like Rodgers isn't though enforcing an authoritarian top-down coaching solution. If you do that your QB likely rebels and you're forced to try a different solution or double down and claim you are OK with moving on from your QB.

It's important to keep in mind the personalities involved. I think there are probably coaches out there that can better use the talents Rodgers still has and 'fix' some of the problems his aging game is manifesting, but it's got to be someone that can give and take. That is, btw, why I'm dubious on someone like Jim Harbaugh because his strength seems to be in a more "my way or the highway" approach that works better for less experienced younger players who aren't as set in their ways- not a 2-time-MVP with a big ego who has an entire career worth of experience with what he likes to do.

Totally agree. I think he needs a "buddy" much as anything. But that Jedi mind trick buddy who can convince Aaron he's doing what Aaron wants to do while really running his offense lol

[Tperk]

Maybe a new head coach that is willing to accept input on his new OC and/or QB coach from his 2 time former MVP QB. I think that if we find someone that Rodgers respects and likes and put him in a position to work directly with him, it would cure alot of what seems to be ailing on the offensive side of the ball. I know that isnt really how things should work, ie letting players dictate front office decisions, but this is a little different situation than most around the league.

[MacReady]

Just now, LacyIsGood said:

I wouldn't fire MM now because I think there is a real chance the Browns would trade for him. 

Seems you and I are the only ones who think this.