gdt8: mesomorphic peckers versus KC kief's 2019 exclusive (MNF): bashaud's return to gorgeos green bay 2019 + "the incomparable" tony brown recoups his starting position PART UN

[Leader]

2 minutes ago, Cakeshoppe said:

he was in on specials

Okay. Thanks. He (apparently) didnt do anything special cause he doesnt have a stat to his name.

So he's been replaced in the Secondary rotations?

[TheBitzMan]

Lazard has basically been the #1 WR option the last two weeks and will be the #2 when Adams comes back. Lazard lead the team in WR snaps against Oakland and I am pretty sure he did last night as well. Rodgers trusts him and he looks good. MVS doesn't need to be the #2, which is a good thing. 

I would put the probability Gute trades for a WR at 10% and that 10% is only for Corey Davis. 

[Leader]

I tell ya....one rugged dude is Jamaal Williams. That guy takes some *serious* shots when he's running the ball. Guess it's cause he's not the quickest/fastest - but he seemed to take more "zeroed in" shots than Jones. Gonna nickname him the Energizer Bunny. He takes a licking and gets on ticking.

 

[Packerraymond]

8 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

No child can rant as well as I can. 

And no, it's very simple:

I've been saying for three years Rodgers needs to throw to running backs more to improve himself and our offense.
Rodgers is throwing to his backs more, and it is improving himself and our offense. 

Deep down you know this is true.  And don't act like McCarthy didn't work to get backs involved more.  He had Randall Cobb as a back, he had Ty Montgomery converted to RB.  Rodgers wouldn't throw to either Montgomery or Cobb when they were at RB.  He did for 2 games in 2016 when Montgomery had back-to-back 10 reception games.  He was still technically a receiver then. 

Aaron Jones is currently on pace to shatter the receptions record for a RB in Aaron's entire career. 

I have already acknowledged that LaFleur has done an amazing job at getting backs involved and getting Rodgers to throw to them.  So how am I wrong exactly?  When did I ever say anything other than Rodgers needs to throw to his backs more often?  Did Jones not have the ability to run these same routes with McCarthy?  Are you saying our backs never ran these types of routes under McCarthy? 

Because I can show you a Steelers game with Hundley at QB, a Browns game with Hundley at QB that had wheel routes and running backs open deep downfield that Hundley threw to. 

Jamaal Williams had 2 career receiving touchdowns before this year.  One of them was against the Steelers, one was against the Browns. 

https://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2017112611/2017/REG12/packers@steelers

It was a screen pass.  Think back honestly, realistically... How many screen passes can you remember Rodgers throwing under McCarthy, and how many can you remember where he just for whatever reason threw a terrible pass on a screen or threw it into the dirt? 

https://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2017121003/2017/REG14/packers@browns

Jamaal Williams split out wide.  Almost like yeah, McCarthy did that, too. 

Then look at Aaron Jones in the Seattle game last year. 

The little toss eerily similar to the shovel passes Rodgers has been getting credit for as touchdown passes for Jones. 

On another TD drive against Seattle... Pressure gets to Rodgers quickly and he flicks it to Jones, who takes it for 22 yards.  On that same drive...

Guess what, it's a wheel route.  Rodgers throws, Jones catches, TD. 

To sit here and act like McCarthy didn't call other routes for running backs than checkdowns is just perfectly stupid.  McCarthy did, and he did it frequently.  He put Cobb back there, he put Montgomery back there, he called screen passes, he called routes to the flat, he called wheel routes.  He split running backs out wide.  Hell, he even put Montgomery at RB and then split him out wide and now you've got a CONVERTED WR TO RB.  He did the same thing with Cobb. 

So acting like I am somehow wrong here in any way whatsoever is just... Well, anyone who can look at this objectively can see why I'd get a little peeved by being told I was wrong on all this.  Only in the Packer subforum can someone say for three years that Rodgers needs to throw to the running backs more and then be told they were wrong when Rodgers has success throwing to running backs more. 

 

Mac was here a long time, he did just about everything schematically that you could show me an example of. I won't refute that Mac had some plays designed to go to a back. The usage and frequency in which LaFleur does it is far greater. He is much more an athlete in space kind of guy.

[MacReady]

1 minute ago, Packerraymond said:

Mac was here a long time, he did just about everything schematically that you could show me an example of. I won't refute that Mac had some plays designed to go to a back. The usage and frequency in which LaFleur does it is far greater. He is much more an athlete in space kind of guy.

Yeah, and I’ve acknowledged that.  Again, show me where I was wrong in any of this.  Let’s get to that.  Yes or no, was I wrong?

Quick review:

Three years saying Rodgers needs to throw to backs more often.  Three years Rodgers not throwing to backs often enough.  Offense, Rodgers - struggle.

Rodgers throws to backs more often.  Offense, Rodgers - thrive.

Where was I wrong?  Please draw me a picture because I just can’t see where I was wrong.

[Norse65]

Lazard is like a power forward. He attacks the ball and the defender. He boxes out the DB effectively. This increases his value to the scheme and sets MVS back a notch.  IMO.  
 
Trotting Sheppard out there to make ugly fair catches is a stranger strategy every week.  Menenga needs to take a second look at this segment of his game plan.  Put the kid on ice until next season if you still see something there. 

[Mr Anonymous]

2 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

Yeah, and I’ve acknowledged that.  Again, show me where I was wrong in any of this.  Let’s get to that.  Yes or no, was I wrong?

Quick review:

Three years saying Rodgers needs to throw to backs more often.  Three years Rodgers not throwing to backs often enough.  Offense, Rodgers - struggle.

Rodgers throws to backs more often.  Offense, Rodgers - thrive.

Where was I wrong?  Please draw me a picture because I just can’t see where I was wrong.

But I thought all your posts here were in jest?

[coachbuns]

32 minutes ago, HighCalebR said:

Theres a reason coaches say "I have to go watch the film on that" ad nauseam in post game interviews. We see such a limited amount of people who arent the QB it's hard to say what's going on outside of what the broadcast crew wants to show you. Theres been more opportunities for everyone that's playing out there at one point or another but for whatever the reason (their spot in the progression, how Rodgers feels about their matchup pre snap) they don't always get the opportunity to make the play. I miss A LOT during the first watch through, between posting in the GDT and maybe keying on a specific guy during a play I basically know nothing until the 2nd/3rd watch.

Everyone wants to move MVS down the depth chart but if you do that there's going to be even less opportunities for him to make the big plays that he currently is. When you have a big play threat you kindve just have to ride that horse and hopefully MVS grows his skillset with the additional reps.

This is a world of what have you done for me lately.  He's not a #2 receiver … maybe a 3 or a 4.  You need somebody to step up more than 1-2 catches a game.  A big play threat is nice if he produces.  (He dropped a catchable bomb yesterday)  Potential has gotten many a coach fired.  We have gotten by nicely without Adams but need him desperately down the road.  Let MVS grow as our 3-4 receiver but to "ride him and hope for improved skillset",  I'm not so convinced.  

[Sasquatch]

1 hour ago, coachbuns said:

Chiefs game plan was to get the ball out of Moore's hand ASAP and let his crew of highly skilled wr's and te's do the work.  You can't go man to man with 3 guys that run a 4.4 and under plus the leagues best tight end just run down the field.   All Moore did was not self destruct and let his offensive partners do the work.  Reid had extra time to game plan and he is good at it.  Vikings are not going to crush KC … what kool aid you been drinking?

 

What?  Moore wasn't going to beat us deep last night - at least not consistently if we had played our DB's up even 5 more yards than we did.  Mahomes, yes, I would've played exactly like we did last night.  Disrupt Moore and those short crossing routes, play closer to the line, and we probably limit a lot of the big plays we gave up - especially since we suck at tackling in space.  I'll just tag your cool-aid comment, since you're so damn cocky and sure of yourself.  SMH.

[MacReady]

Just now, Mr Anonymous said:

But I thought all your posts here were in jest?

If I wanted any crap out of you I'd squeeze your head. 

Edited October 28, 2019 by Outpost31

[coachbuns]

Just now, Sasquatch said:

What?  Moore wasn't going to beat us deep last night - at least not consistently if we had played our DB's up even 5 more yards than we did.  Mahomes, yes, I would've played exactly like we did last night.  Disrupt Moore and those short crossing routes, play closer to the line, and we probably limit a lot of the big plays we gave up - especially since we suck at tackling in space.  I'll just tag your cool-aid comment, since you're so damn cocky and sure of yourself.  SMH.

What are you so upset about?  We won doing what we did.  Quickness kills for KC and we struggled even on short routes.  One wrong step and they have 3 guys who run 4.4 and under plus the best tight end in the league.  We suck at tackling period so you think we're going to do that with those type guys in space?   Bend, not break was the key to this game and it worked!  Not cocky at all … you said CRUSH so who's cocky?  Think it will be a tight game with KC winning but Vikings crushing them …  sounds cocky on your part, not mine.  Plus it's Kool-Aid but if KC wins it WILL be Cool Aid for the Pack.

[Howler]

11 minutes ago, Sasquatch said:

What?  Moore wasn't going to beat us deep last night - at least not consistently if we had played our DB's up even 5 more yards than we did.  Mahomes, yes, I would've played exactly like we did last night.  Disrupt Moore and those short crossing routes, play closer to the line, and we probably limit a lot of the big plays we gave up - especially since we suck at tackling in space.  I'll just tag your cool-aid comment, since you're so damn cocky and sure of yourself.  SMH.

Yep. Wind was a factor too. He was limited throwing downfield. 

[coachbuns]

Just now, Outpost31 said:

If I wanted any crap out of you I'd squeeze your head. 

Sorry dude … you've lost it.  Take some time off and relax.

[Sasquatch]

1 hour ago, coachbuns said:

Nothing … we won the frickin game dude.  You play tight man to man on these guys and you lose.  Bend but don't break and keep them out of the end zone when things get tightened up in the red zone wins games.  7-1 works for me.

I stated earlier at least a dozen times how happy I am that we won given that a backup QB behind three, THREE backup Oline picked us apart because GB was playing 10 yards off the line.  It's one thing to give up the underneath stuff - but NOT NOT NOT when your defense tackles like absolute sh!t in space - especially against speed guys.  Play up, and dare Moore to beat you deep.  He won't, especially if you play up and disrupt those timing plays.  It was a great scheme for Mahomie.  I'd have like to seen something different with Moore - that's all I'm saying.  Glad we won (for the 15th time). 

[MacReady]

Just now, coachbuns said:

Sorry dude … you've lost it.  Take some time off and relax.

Thanks for the advice.