Is Aaron Rodgers still good as a pre-snap QB?

[MrBobGray]

I don't have time to read all 16 pages of this tonight, that'll be tomorrow, but I have to say that I considered making this same topic myself.  I started wondering this myself when I noticed how often he was taken down by a nickle or safety blitz last season.  It's one thing if the protection messes up or his receiver doesn't look for the ball on the hot route.  But more often than not he just doesn't seem to anticipate the blitz at all; I feel like I've seen him get sacked by a guy he never saw coming more in the last three years than the previous eight.

On a pseudo-related note, I felt like this first snap of the Broncos game is a nice microcosm of some of my issues with Aaron's play lately.

So just looking at this play, we've got MVS wide left, Jones in the backfield, Mercedes in line on the right, Adams in the slot and Vitale lined up wide right.  The Broncos have a CB lined up over Vitale, leaving a LB lined up over Davante so we can assume it's a form of zone since Fangio isn't patently insane.  Adams and Mercedes are running slants with Vitale coming in behind them on a crosser, and on the other side you've got MVS running a dig with Jones going to the flats behind him.  This is a pretty basic play, but I still like the design; some quick hitters that draw defenders to the middle and options to attack the empty spots as the defenders follow their guy.  Except, as we'll notice here, Rodgers doesn't throw the damn ball.  The problem with holding the ball on this particular play is there's no developing routes.  Everything is short, and within three seconds the play as schemed is done.  Compounding the matter is Rodgers reading this left to right; the entire right side of this play is essentially a decoy because by the slants are done before Rodgers can come off his first read, and Vitale's crosser was DOA as soon as it was zone (unless you want three yards I guess).  

However, that's not what bothers me about this play.  What bothers me about this play is the combo of 1) that Rodgers starts this read with MVS but then can't throw it that way because Chubb drops right into his throwing lane, and 2) Rodgers has Adams 1v1 with a LB running a slant off the line and never even tried to go there. 

I wanted to write more about this play but I'm crashing hard, but what bugs me here is that I can't see how the pre-snap read here isn't Adams.  There's a lot of bodies in the area but you know Mercedes is taking one with him, that's the whole point of the double slant concept.  51 needs to stay in front of Mercedes, so Adams is all but guaranteed to be open.  If Rodgers is reading this right pre-snap, he should be taking the free money all day. The Packers arguably have the look they want and Rodgers doesn't go to it.  Off-schedule football is fine when you have no choice, but that wasn't the case here.  Rodgers blew this play up because he was going left all day when he saw 26 bail early, but he got caught with his hand in the cookie jar.  By starting there he immediately put himself into a bind with the rest of the play design.  It really feels like Rodgers simply is not willing to make throws into tight windows, especially over the middle.  

Or I'm just totally misreading this play, it's late and definitely time to sleep.

[waterfish_21]

If i recall that is the first play of the game?  I watched the play as well and thought it was a 1 man route on the far right WR and a check down option to the left ( that went wrong).  I think the two middle routes are just there to clear space for the top route.  All teams run that concept.

 

Also late to the party but, @AlexGreen#20 did you see the play where the broncos had an advantage vs a very unbalanced defensive front, than Flacco motioned a TE (i believe) into even a greater advantage.  I think it was 4vs1 on the run side because we didn't adjust other than Amos following the TE from 10 yards off the LOS.

 

[deathstar]

8 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

You would be better off looking at personnel groupings:

2018 Packers: 2.72 WRs/Snap

2018 Titans 2.45 WRs/Snap

2019 Packers: 2.41 WRs/Snap

Because why actually watch the game when you can reference one stat that “proves” a point?

[Donzo]

OMG, what a ridiculous thread on so many levels.

LOL!

[waterfish_21]

Do those stats count a RB as a WR when they are lined up as one?  Because that happens quite a bit in this offense.

[coachbuns]

8 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

At the moment we're running play action deep shots. That's going to require Rodgers to take a few hits if this thing is going to approach functional. 

There is the problem then.  What happened to the new age offense where the running back is used in the passing game, bunch formations, picks/rubs, etc?  Time to get the ball out of Rodgers hand ala Brady.

[AlexGreen#20]

39 minutes ago, deathstar said:

Because why actually watch the game when you can reference one stat that “proves” a point?

Because every coach uses many of the same principles. It would take me 100 plays to even begin to establish any kind of pattern. There were plays last year where we had RBs split out and running routes, but that doesn't account for the frequency with which it occurred.

[deathstar]

1 minute ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Because every coach uses many of the same principles. It would take me 100 plays to even begin to establish any kind of pattern. There were plays last year where we had RBs split out and running routes, but that doesn't account for the frequency with which it occurred.

Ok. I hope you understand how that doesn’t line up with your comments on this offense. On one hand you feel fine comparing this offense to others in the league, but on the other you believe it is currently almost indistinguishable from any other in the league. 

[AlexGreen#20]

4 hours ago, MrBobGray said:

I don't have time to read all 16 pages of this tonight, that'll be tomorrow, but I have to say that I considered making this same topic myself.  I started wondering this myself when I noticed how often he was taken down by a nickle or safety blitz last season.  It's one thing if the protection messes up or his receiver doesn't look for the ball on the hot route.  But more often than not he just doesn't seem to anticipate the blitz at all; I feel like I've seen him get sacked by a guy he never saw coming more in the last three years than the previous eight.

On a pseudo-related note, I felt like this first snap of the Broncos game is a nice microcosm of some of my issues with Aaron's play lately.

So just looking at this play, we've got MVS wide left, Jones in the backfield, Mercedes in line on the right, Adams in the slot and Vitale lined up wide right.  The Broncos have a CB lined up over Vitale, leaving a LB lined up over Davante so we can assume it's a form of zone since Fangio isn't patently insane.  Adams and Mercedes are running slants with Vitale coming in behind them on a crosser, and on the other side you've got MVS running a dig with Jones going to the flats behind him.  This is a pretty basic play, but I still like the design; some quick hitters that draw defenders to the middle and options to attack the empty spots as the defenders follow their guy.  Except, as we'll notice here, Rodgers doesn't throw the damn ball.  The problem with holding the ball on this particular play is there's no developing routes.  Everything is short, and within three seconds the play as schemed is done.  Compounding the matter is Rodgers reading this left to right; the entire right side of this play is essentially a decoy because by the slants are done before Rodgers can come off his first read, and Vitale's crosser was DOA as soon as it was zone (unless you want three yards I guess).  

However, that's not what bothers me about this play.  What bothers me about this play is the combo of 1) that Rodgers starts this read with MVS but then can't throw it that way because Chubb drops right into his throwing lane, and 2) Rodgers has Adams 1v1 with a LB running a slant off the line and never even tried to go there. 

I wanted to write more about this play but I'm crashing hard, but what bugs me here is that I can't see how the pre-snap read here isn't Adams.  There's a lot of bodies in the area but you know Mercedes is taking one with him, that's the whole point of the double slant concept.  51 needs to stay in front of Mercedes, so Adams is all but guaranteed to be open.  If Rodgers is reading this right pre-snap, he should be taking the free money all day. The Packers arguably have the look they want and Rodgers doesn't go to it.  Off-schedule football is fine when you have no choice, but that wasn't the case here.  Rodgers blew this play up because he was going left all day when he saw 26 bail early, but he got caught with his hand in the cookie jar.  By starting there he immediately put himself into a bind with the rest of the play design.  It really feels like Rodgers simply is not willing to make throws into tight windows, especially over the middle.  

Or I'm just totally misreading this play, it's late and definitely time to sleep.

I assume triple in breakers is always to free up the outside man, so top of the screen. In this case Vitale. We love settling for three yards.

I really like the arrow route by MVS here. That's the real winner on this play. 

[AlexGreen#20]

Just now, deathstar said:

Ok. I hope you understand how that doesn’t line up with your comments on this offense. On one hand you feel fine comparing this offense to others in the league, but on the other you believe it is currently almost indistinguishable from any other in the league. 

What's the difference between a good offense and a bad offense? I genuinely don't know how to show this.

WR Snap Percentages? The span from the best to the worst is basically 2.5 to 3.0 WRs per play. You're talking snap personnel groupings.

Optimal run/pass play calling? How does one prove that, compare a season's worth of data showing that MLF runs on 2nd and long 55% and MM ran on 2nd and long 33%. That's still a difference of like 25 plays over a season. Like 1.5 per game.

Statistical successes? We've beaten that to death. Our current offense sucks statistically.

Deep shots per game? I suppose I could compile that, but is anybody going to view that as a positive indicator?

Big Plays per game? That comes down more to execution.

Turnovers per game? A measure of your QB.

The difference between a great offensive scheme like the Chiefs and a terrible offensive scheme like ours makes up for what, 5% of the difference in offensive production?

[AlexGreen#20]

21 minutes ago, coachbuns said:

There is the problem then.  What happened to the new age offense where the running back is used in the passing game, bunch formations, picks/rubs, etc?  Time to get the ball out of Rodgers hand ala Brady.

I guess I don't know why anybody assumed we were getting a super spread or any kind of futuristic offense when it seems like we hired a guy to be Mike Shanahan, a dude that started being a Head Coach in 1988.

[Fl0nkerton]

wait so we want our 36 year old qb to stand and deliver for a shot in the ribs for what now?

To...see Tim Boyle for a month? 

"If I were 36 and an all world QB I would simply take every hit imaginable because I don't want to look like a *****!"

[deathstar]

46 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

What's the difference between a good offense and a bad offense? I genuinely don't know how to show this.

WR Snap Percentages? The span from the best to the worst is basically 2.5 to 3.0 WRs per play. You're talking snap personnel groupings.

Optimal run/pass play calling? How does one prove that, compare a season's worth of data showing that MLF runs on 2nd and long 55% and MM ran on 2nd and long 33%. That's still a difference of like 25 plays over a season. Like 1.5 per game.

Statistical successes? We've beaten that to death. Our current offense sucks statistically.

Deep shots per game? I suppose I could compile that, but is anybody going to view that as a positive indicator?

Big Plays per game? That comes down more to execution.

Turnovers per game? A measure of your QB.

The difference between a great offensive scheme like the Chiefs and a terrible offensive scheme like ours makes up for what, 5% of the difference in offensive production?

Again you do this a lot. Aside from throwing out things that show our offense is not terrible, you dance around comments. I asked you before - if our offense is so terrible how do we have so many open looks that Rodgers is missing? If our offense is so terrible why are we so successful in the red zone? If we are calling our offense like we have Mariota at QB then show me that, personnel groupings don’t tell me what we are trying to accomplish. 

In the end, to me, it looks like you decided from the first press conference that this was going to be a bad offense, because of LaFleur’s comments on committing to the run. Then you hated the hiring of Hackett. Since then I haven’t seen one comment from you actually looking at our offensive playbook and evaluating it. I would love to see your thoughts on that. 

[cannondale]

22 minutes ago, deathstar said:

Again you do this a lot. Aside from throwing out things that show our offense is not terrible, you dance around comments. I asked you before - if our offense is so terrible how do we have so many open looks that Rodgers is missing? If our offense is so terrible why are we so successful in the red zone? If we are calling our offense like we have Mariota at QB then show me that, personnel groupings don’t tell me what we are trying to accomplish. 

In the end, to me, it looks like you decided from the first press conference that this was going to be a bad offense, because of LaFleur’s comments on committing to the run. Then you hated the hiring of Hackett. Since then I haven’t seen one comment from you actually looking at our offensive playbook and evaluating it. I would love to see your thoughts on that. 

Watch any NFL game and see how many times the telestrator is used to circle bunch formations and picks and route combinations that result in WR's running wide open. It has happened exactly zero times for this offense. But MLF has the market cornered on 1 man WR screens that lose yardage. Innovative !!!

Edited September 25, 2019 by cannondale

[Fl0nkerton]

I think some of you should maybe not watch the games since you hate everything so much.

Or just watch the Defense. You might be less angry on Al Gore's Internet.