Aaron Rodgers Appreciation Thread 4.20

[MacReady]

27 minutes ago, Arthur Penske said:

Interesting. So sacks are to Rodgers, as INTs are to Favre. 

I know which I'd take.

You really are a pro at turning a discussion in your favor...  to the uninitiated.  Doesn't work so well on others though. 

This was never a discussion on Favre versus Rodgers.  You tried to suggest that it was partly because of McCarthy.  You were completely shut down in that attempt as Favre's sack total in 2007 under McCarthy was the second best in his career, proving it was not a McCarthy thing. 

Then you tried again to turn it into Favre/Rodgers. 

It's not.  It's Rodgers/NFL, and you can't blame McCarthy. 

Additionally,

http://settingedge.com/sackskilldrives

939 out of 1,118 sacks lead to ending the drive.  That is 83%.  Acting like interceptions are utterly terrible compared to a sack that should not be taken is just ridiculous.  If Rodgers threw 10 more interceptions a year and got sacked 30 times less a year, that is a better year.  Rodgers won't do it because he's egotistical and is obsessed with his TD:INT ratio. 

Because he is selfish. 

[vegas492]

16 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

Rodgers won't do it because he's egotistical and is obsessed with his TD:INT ratio. 

Because he is selfish. 

You know, I want to say there is something to Rodgers being selfish.  And maybe there is...

But, wouldn't the selfish guy take the easy checkdowns to pad the stats?  It would up the completion percentage.  More first downs means more plays.  More plays means more possible yards and possible scores.

Here's what I think.....Mac and Rodgers used analytics and saw a very strong correlation between a large "chunk" plays and touchdowns.  Rodgers showed great ability to move around in the pocket to extend plays, which put a lot of pressure on defenses and led to more those chunk plays than even a good offense could generate on it's own.  Add to it the hard count and free plays and it just fed into extending plays and going deep without having any negative consequence.  Given those things?  I think that led to where we were at last year.

Only along the way, defenses learned how to contain Rodgers in the pocket and not let him get clear running or throwing lanes.  Defenses started playing deeper and almost dared Rodgers to take those check downs.  While getting hits on him.  Which took their tool and ultimately he got injured a few times.

So maybe there is some selfishness there, but I think there is a lot of competitiveness there as well.  I just don't think Rodgers adjusted his game after the defenses figured out what he was doing.  And honestly, it is a pretty easy fix.  Take the open underneath stuff.

[snackattack]

24 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

You really are a pro at turning a discussion in your favor...  to the uninitiated.  Doesn't work so well on others though. 

This was never a discussion on Favre versus Rodgers.  You tried to suggest that it was partly because of McCarthy.  You were completely shut down in that attempt as Favre's sack total in 2007 under McCarthy was the second best in his career, proving it was not a McCarthy thing. 

Then you tried again to turn it into Favre/Rodgers. 

It's not.  It's Rodgers/NFL, and you can't blame McCarthy. 

Additionally,

http://settingedge.com/sackskilldrives

939 out of 1,118 sacks lead to ending the drive.  That is 83%.  Acting like interceptions are utterly terrible compared to a sack that should not be taken is just ridiculous.  If Rodgers threw 10 more interceptions a year and got sacked 30 times less a year, that is a better year.  Rodgers won't do it because he's egotistical and is obsessed with his TD:INT ratio. 

Because he is selfish. 

Mostly agree with your commentary above, except for the last few sentences. Yes Rodgers is obsessed with not throwing picks, but you are labelling that as him being selfish / cares too much about his ratio. Why cant it be that he would rather take the sack, not turn the ball over , and punt? That is better than throwing a pick.

[Arthur Penske]

1 hour ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Is not at all the discussion that is being had. 

It’s relevant.

[OneTwoSixFive]

42 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

 

It's Rodgers/NFL, and you can't blame McCarthy.   <edit>

Oh I don't think McCarthy gets away without blame here, it's his scheme.

I won't put it all on him, or even most of it, but he doesn't walk away spotlessly clean.

I'd say it's on Rodgers most of all (though some of that is injury), plus inexperience (in the receiver group), plus scheme and maybe a hint of designed confrontation from Rodgers due to frustration toward McCarthy.

Also, if you think Rodgers is selfish because of his high TD to int ratio, how does that look different from him trying to not make mistakes for the team. His actions can be viewed through the lens of being selfish, or as a team player, AND BOTH LOOK THE SAME ON THE FIELD. You can put your own spin on it, and that is fine, this is a forum that likes debate, but it doesn't mean others can't put their own spin on it.

 

Edited July 10, 2019 by OneTwoSixFive

[MacReady]

Just now, OneTwoSixFive said:

Oh I don't think McCarthy gets away without blame here, it's his scheme.

Need citation for where McCarthy's scheme indicates the QB should not throw to wide open targets. 

 

Just now, snackattack said:

Why cant it be that he would rather take the sack, not turn the ball over , and punt? That is better than throwing a pick.

Because there's a better option.  Better options. 

1. Throwing the got damn ball to open receivers.
2. Throwing the ball away. 

 

[OneTwoSixFive]

13 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

Need citation for where McCarthy's scheme indicates the QB should not throw to wide open targets. 

 

Because there's a better option.  Better options. 

1. Throwing the got damn ball to open receivers.
2. Throwing the ball away. 

 

There have been many references to McCarthy's scheme being too unchanging over his later years, making it easier to read for defenses and therefore easier to defend. Since other teams knew his scheme tendencies fairly well, the gaps get smaller and close faster, so the thrower needs high confidence in the receiver if he has to throw to a spot before the receiver makes his cut. the  The old saying about you playbook "If you aren't going forward you are going backwards", applies here. You must continue to evolve it enough to keep opposing teams uncertain of what is coming.

Anyway, I see nothing that determines Rodgers conduct (in terms of TD/int decisions) as selfish, it can be viewed other ways. Has Rodgers gone too far in trying to avoid interceptions, you can argue that he has...........hopefully, with a new HC/coordinator, new playbook and receivers with a key year under their belts, he can turn that around.

Edited July 10, 2019 by OneTwoSixFive

[MacReady]

Just now, OneTwoSixFive said:

There have been many references to McCarthy's scheme being too unchanging over his later years, making it easier to read for defenses and therefore easier to defend.

Might be a little less predictable if defenders had to worry about running backs in the passing game I think.  Remember, it was specifically Rodgers, not McCarthy, the Giants DB singled out and said they knew how to stop in the 2011 season.  And they stopped him.  The Packers were bottom three in the league in targeting running backs for Aaron's entire time here.  That's not scheme, that's execution. 

Quote

Since other teams knew his scheme tendencies fairly well, the gaps get smaller and close faster, so the thrower needs high confidence in the receiver if he has to throw to a spot before the receiver makes his cut. the  The old saying about you playbook "If you aren't going forward you are going backwards", applies here. You must continue to evolve it enough to keep opposing teams uncertain of what is coming.

This isn't even true.  How much do you think the Saints or Patriots schemes have changed over the years? 

We were a top 5 offense in 2013 with Wallace/Tolzien/Flynn starting at QB while Rodgers was hurt. 

34/58 receptions by running backs were while Rodgers was hurt.

330/427 yards by running backs were while Rodgers was hurt. 

Just look at Jamaal Williams and what he did for us in 2017.  He had 25 receptions for 262 yards and 2 touchdowns as a receiver.  2 of those 25 receptions were passes from Rodgers for 7 yards.  The rest were from Hundley. 

I'm sick to damn death of all the McCarthy blaming here when it is abundantly clear based on every shred of evidence that Rodgers actively avoids throwing to running backs and that it was clearly NOT a McCarthy design issue. 

HOW EASY/HARD DO YOU THINK IT IS FOR A DEFENSE TO DEFEND AGAINST AN OFFENSE THAT ELIMINATES AN ENTIRE PLAYER FROM THE PASSING GAME? 

Do people here honestly believe that defenses don't realize that Rodgers avoids running backs? 

[KingOfTheNorth]

Considering MM was Rodgers' only Pro coach until recently, I think its a little weird to say he isn't at fault for any of Rodgers' issues. I give MM some credit for helping Rodgers turn into the Pro he is. I also give him some fault for the negatives that have hampered Rodgers in recent years. Not checking down, not targeting running backs (sometimes the same issue) and holding onto the ball too long are all coachable issues.

[boratt]

1 hour ago, Outpost31 said:

You really are a pro at turning a discussion in your favor...  to the uninitiated.  Doesn't work so well on others though. 

This was never a discussion on Favre versus Rodgers.  You tried to suggest that it was partly because of McCarthy.  You were completely shut down in that attempt as Favre's sack total in 2007 under McCarthy was the second best in his career, proving it was not a McCarthy thing. 

Then you tried again to turn it into Favre/Rodgers. 

It's not.  It's Rodgers/NFL, and you can't blame McCarthy. 

Additionally,

http://settingedge.com/sackskilldrives

939 out of 1,118 sacks lead to ending the drive.  That is 83%.  Acting like interceptions are utterly terrible compared to a sack that should not be taken is just ridiculous.  If Rodgers threw 10 more interceptions a year and got sacked 30 times less a year, that is a better year.  Rodgers won't do it because he's egotistical and is obsessed with his TD:INT ratio. 

Because he is selfish. 

YES!!!

[boratt]

11 minutes ago, KingOfTheNorth said:

Considering MM was Rodgers' only Pro coach until recently, I think its a little weird to say he isn't at fault for any of Rodgers' issues. I give MM some credit for helping Rodgers turn into the Pro he is. I also give him some fault for the negatives that have hampered Rodgers in recent years. Not checking down, not targeting running backs (sometimes the same issue) and holding onto the ball too long are all coachable issues.

Not if the player refuses to change. 

[MacReady]

Here is every sack, fumble and interception from Rodgers in 2018:

First play - Looks like 89 is definitely open for 5 yards.  Sack.
Second play - Jimmy Graham is open almost immediately.  Sack.
Third play - No real chance at anything.
Fourth play - Eh, Montgomery was open.  Wouldn't have gained much, but wouldn't have been a sack.
Fifth play - No real chance at anything.
*Sixth play - Tell me if Rodgers didn't step up in the pocket trying to buy more time and instead waited until Williams popped open that's not a 5-10 yard play.  He literally steps INTO the sack to try to buy more time when Williams was gonna pop open.  Who was even guarding Williams?  Rodgers could have spun out to avoid whoever it was that beat Bakhtiari and had Williams right in front of him.
*Seventh play LOOK AT THIS PLAY AT 58 SECONDS INTO THE VIDEO.  THERE IS LITERALLY NOBODY WITHIN 6 YARDS OF AARON JONES. 
*Eighth play is kinda an aside, but everybody blames Graham for Aaron's two interceptions.  Uh... That ball was tipped before it got within three yards of Graham.
*Ninth play, nobody goes with the RB and Rodgers is too busy staring down Adams.  Just look at this ninth play.  Nobody is there for the RB.  Rodgers sees a defender coming at him, won't even throw it away or look to a clear security blanket option.  Blame McCarthy. 
*10th play looks like there was nothing.  Wasn't even a sack.  Don't know why it's on there.
*11th play - That's holding onto the ball too long.
*12th play - Players running into each other, should have gotten rid of the ball.
*13th play looks like he could have thrown to whoever that was on the sideline instead of trying to step up and throw it. 
*14th play at 1:50.  Look at Rodgers looking at an open ESB.  Look at Rodgers not throwing to ESB.  Look at Rodgers taking a sack.
*15th play is holding onto the ball too long.
*16th and 17th plays look like they were just sacks.
*18th play looks like Allison is open for a first down.
*19th play looks like Adams is open for a first down, but that might have been an iffy pass.
*20th play is just a sack.
*21st play is a failed run I guess.
*22nd play is a sack.
*23rd play is a sack.
*24th play, ESB is open again.  By a lot.
*25th play is a sack.
*26th play looks like someone was open for a quick gain.
*27th play just a sack.
*Pause at 3:22 and tell me that's not a first down for Aaron Jones.  Nope, it's a sack, lol. 
*29th play, give Williams a shot.  Or just fling it to Jimmy Graham once you passed on Williams.
*Sack.
*Sack
*4:11, Jamaal Williams

 

[Shanedorf]

from that same sackskilldrives website, on the very next page

http://settingedge.com/fourvertsfuture

Why NFL Teams Should Go Deep More Often: EPA Passing Strategy

Now that we have information on the overall value of deep and short passes and how down, distance, and field position affects that value, what does any of this mean for actual strategy in the NFL?

The first obvious conclusion is that teams should be throwing deep much more often than they currently are. Despite holding roughly twice as much value per play, deep passes are attempted less than a quarter as often as short passes.  If you limit the sample to 1st Down only then deep passes hold 95 times the value per play of short passes according to EPA/Attempt, yet are still attempted less than a quarter as often.  To put it simply: that’s absurd. 

 

[KingOfTheNorth]

1 minute ago, boratt said:

Not if the player refuses to change. 

Something like this doesn't develop overnight. Rodgers has proved he is willing to change when he entered the league and changed his delivery. If that coach/player relationship deteriorated to the point where Rodgers wouldn't listen to MM, then once again that falls on both the player and the coach.

[MacReady]

Just now, KingOfTheNorth said:

Considering MM was Rodgers' only Pro coach until recently, I think its a little weird to say he isn't at fault for any of Rodgers' issues. I give MM some credit for helping Rodgers turn into the Pro he is. I also give him some fault for the negatives that have hampered Rodgers in recent years. Not checking down, not targeting running backs (sometimes the same issue) and holding onto the ball too long are all coachable issues.

This is learned behavior from Rodgers.

Running backs in Aaron's first year:

Grant - 18 receptions, Jackson - 30 receptions,

Aaron's second year:

Grant - 25 receptions, Jackson - 21 receptions

Aaron's third year:

Jackson - 43 receptions

2011:

Grant had 19 receptions for 268 yards.  Starks had 29 receptions for 216 yards.

Is it any wonder that Aaron's best year is the year he threw to running backs most often?