Love is in the air! Poll!!

[incognito_man]

4 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

If you read "for the past 10 years" as "exactly 10 years ago and not once since", I'm going to stop here and presume that nothing positive is going to come out of the conversation.

I'm questioning what relevance 10 years ago has on MLFs offense 

[ramssuperbowl99]

Just now, incognito_man said:

I'm questioning what relevance 10 years ago has on MLFs offense 

And you picked 10 years ago, not last year, or 2 years ago when "for the past 10 years" implies each of those years because it's convenient, even though it's clearly, obviously not what I mean even when I spell the difference out in plain English.

You're not trying to understand, you're nitpicking in bad faith.

[MKnight82]

I don't think he will be in the league in 5 years. 

[incognito_man]

1 minute ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

And you picked 10 years ago, not last year, or 2 years ago when "for the past 10 years" implies each of those years because it's convenient, even though it's clearly, obviously not what I mean even when I spell the difference out in plain English.

You're not trying to understand, you're nitpicking in bad faith.

Not at all. You chose the words, not me. Let's pick 5 years ago instead. Same relevancy question. Or 6 years. Or 7 or 8 or 9. So the majority of years in the range you stated are entirely irrelevant since MLF wasn't the HC.

The relevant years are only those since MLF became the HC. 

It should also be noted Rodgers has a resurgence under MLF when he stuck to the offense.

[Daniel]

I voted bust. Hated him as a prospect and nothing has happened other than him riding the pine since then.

[incognito_man]

14 minutes ago, Daniel said:

I voted bust. Hated him as a prospect and nothing has happened other than him riding the pine since then.

For sure. Absolutely nothing has happened since then except for him sitting down. Astute observation.

[MWil23]

4 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

For sure. Absolutely nothing has happened since then except for him sitting down. Astute observation.

Some believe mental reps and learning a playbook are important for success. Others believe in live reps in game action. Both opinions are equally viable. Perhaps some time for Love has been good for his development...but considering his struggles with anticipation and eye discipline in college, to go with a bit of a long and loopy delivery and spotty ball placement, I'm not sure that's a fix there.

[incognito_man]

31 minutes ago, MWil23 said:

Some believe mental reps and learning a playbook are important for success. Others believe in live reps in game action. Both opinions are equally viable. Perhaps some time for Love has been good for his development...but considering his struggles with anticipation and eye discipline in college, to go with a bit of a long and loopy delivery and spotty ball placement, I'm not sure that's a fix there.

Anything about his college reps are totally irrelevant 4 years later. He's a completely different person and player. I 100% agree that live reps are essential for growth. I 100% understand he realistically could fall flat on his face. But the odds are definitely in his favor. Very clearly the decision makers who understand football think he's ready to step in and be an improvement over Aaron Rodgers value. Otherwise they would have easily just kept Aaron. Aaron wanted to stay in GB and retire here, but our FO and coaching staff just staked their jobs on Jordan Love. When they didn't need to. 

Anyone paying attention should go "hm, GB has a really professional and successful FO and they willingly chose to tie their jobs to Jordan Love over Aaron Rodgers when they really didn't have to..." That tells me everything I need to know about what Jordan Love looks like every day as a professional QB.

[Mazrimiv]

2 hours ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

Plus he's not stepping into any offense, it's an offense where for the past 10 years the QB has not only handled all the pre-snap reads, audibles, etc.,, but has been responsible for making plays during busted plays and has even influenced the personnel. The Packers have OL who are excellent at pass blocking on extended plays, and WRs who's best skill set is the mental side.

Great weapons for a really good QB, but not a QB-friendly supporting cast at all. There's a running game and some talent is better than no talent, but I think people will assume a QB friendly system because he sat and I don't see that.

Several accounts I've read mention Rodgers increasing preference to go off-script from MLF's intended design is a significant part of why GB was looking to move on.  There is no doubt that Rodgers ability to ad-lib has been a huge benefit over his career.  It's also true that the benefit has been in steady decline along with his mobility.  By all accounts, MLF's scheme is supposed to make the initial reads/decisions fairly simple for the QB.  This actually chaffed Rodgers to some degree because he wants (and deserves) more freedom within the offense.  This conflict led to his routinely skipping easier early throws while hunting bigger plays in scramble mode.   

I think the biggest difference we'll see with Love's is the ball will come out quicker.  I expect Love to take what is there on the initial read far more than Rodgers did, which is fine.  That may not be a path to the HOF, but plenty of QB's have played a lot of years doing exactly that.  As much as anything, this is when we find out if the MLF offense works without having a HOF QB taking the snaps.  In truth, I am not convinced it does.

[ramssuperbowl99]

18 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said:

Several accounts I've read mention Rodgers increasing preference to go off-script from MLF's intended design is a significant part of why GB was looking to move on.  There is no doubt that Rodgers ability to ad-lib has been a huge benefit over his career.  It's also true that the benefit has been in steady decline along with his mobility.  By all accounts, MLF's scheme is supposed to make the initial reads/decisions fairly simple for the QB.  This actually chaffed Rodgers to some degree because he wants (and deserves) more freedom within the offense.  This conflict led to his routinely skipping easier early throws while hunting bigger plays in scramble mode. 

Changing a scheme is one thing, but even the personnel are going to need to change. I'm not saying it's impossible, I'm saying it will take time and people shouldn't expect Love to settle into a friendly scheme immediately.

An example would be the OL turnover. The GB OL type has been pretty baked in for a while now; the agile, slightly lighter, pass block forever types that fit Rodgers to a T. They've developed those guys and played to their strengths better than anyone else in football. How does that now change with Love?

How about the WRs? It's been a decade since the Packers have had to worry about a WR who can't get open on their own, the QB can throw them open. Even if Love can do that, having to constantly throw people open isn't easy. And those are little things, but they're baked into the organization at every level because Rodgers was that goddamn good.

18 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said:

I think the biggest difference we'll see with Love's is the ball will come out quicker. I expect Love to take what is there on the initial read far more than Rodgers did, which is fine.  That may not be a path to the HOF, but plenty of QB's have played a lot of years doing exactly that.  As much as anything, this is when we find out if the MLF offense works without having a HOF QB taking the snaps.  In truth, I am not convinced it does.

2023 Rodgers wasn't 2011 Rodgers, but he's the single best QB I've ever seen play. I get what you mean when you say the biggest difference is that the ball will be out quicker - more broadly, yeah, the QB will play within the offense now.

But that's kind of like replacing Steph Curry with a good shooting PG and being like "This should decrease our average 3 point shot distance". Sure, tactically that's the lens you can look through it and understand the difference, but instead of having a QB play hero ball and get you out of impossible jams, it's more likely that you have a QB who plays alright and falls on his face a few times a game. Not an insult to Love at all, that's the level most QBs play at. If you're used to Rodgers, it's going to feel different, but that's because he was a freak of nature.

Edited April 25, 2023 by ramssuperbowl99

[incognito_man]

11 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said:

Several accounts I've read mention Rodgers increasing preference to go off-script from MLF's intended design is a significant part of why GB was looking to move on.  There is no doubt that Rodgers ability to ad-lib has been a huge benefit over his career.  It's also true that the benefit has been in steady decline along with his mobility.  By all accounts, MLF's scheme is supposed to make the initial reads/decisions fairly simple for the QB.  This actually chaffed Rodgers to some degree because he wants (and deserves) more freedom within the offense.  This conflict led to his routinely skipping easier early throws while hunting bigger plays in scramble mode.   

I think the biggest difference we'll see with Love's is the ball will come out quicker.  I expect Love to take what is there on the initial read far more than Rodgers did, which is fine.  That may not be a path to the HOF, but plenty of QB's have played a lot of years doing exactly that.  As much as anything, this is when we find out if the MLF offense works without having a HOF QB taking the snaps.  In truth, I am not convinced it does.

This is all spot on, but I think there's more reason to believe his offense will look better with a QB that plays within it. For the same reason Brock Purdy found success in SF. Lean into your weapons. Love has a dynamic #1 in Watson and our staff is over the moon about Doubs. Aaron Jones should see more, in-sync touches as well. One of the biggest frustrations with Rodgers was our inability to get into offensive rhythm. His play style worked when he had Davante to bail him out. It sucked when he was working with young WRs behind a still hobbled OL. Our challenges in 2022 were exacerbated by Rodgers' stubbornness and it clearly irked our staff BIG time.

I expect to see:

(1) more misses upfront by the OL because Rodgers is a wizened, elite minded QB who frequently gets his OL into advantages

(2) Faster tempo offense both within a play and between them. Aaron spent a LOT of time holding out to identify perceived advantages. I think this ended up being a detriment without Adams.

(3) More turnovers at the QB position

(4) More engagement with the rest of the offense. I can't help but think the other 15ish offensive players will feel more ownership in their roles and more confident in their individual assignments because there's gonna be less on their plate pre-snap (Love is going to audible less)

(5) Even more reliance on the OL. We will be more of a run-first offense and have the OL who can excel as instigators more often.

(6) Bigger role for Aaron Jones (and maybe Dillon). Aaron Jones is a better RB than Love is a QB. We haven't had that in a long time in GB.

(7) More middle of the field attacking. Watson is a damn stud if you hit him in stride. I think we're not done adding MOF weapons, either. I'd expect 2 more added in the draft. Aaron is allergic to the MOF. Love won't be as much.

(8) Growing pains

(9) But ultimately a more efficient offense in the 2nd half of 2023 after Love gets live reps under his belt.

Rodgers relies on tricking the defense with an in-tune partner as his skills wane. Love likely has better deep ball accuracy than Aaron today. We're going to see MLFs actual offense, now, which, if you look at similar offenses around the league (combo of Shanny and McVay), I'm really excited for. The off-script stuff Aaron loves doesn't work as well in 2022 as it did in 2011. Both because of Aaron's waning skills and today's defenses. Love running MLFs offense is going to have growing pains, but we're gonna like the complete package of it more than we did Aaron's hybrid version of it (sans Davante Adams). Aaron needs a stud #1, brainiac WR to be successful. 

[Daniel]

59 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

Anything about his college reps are totally irrelevant 4 years later. He's a completely different person and player.

If you say so.  But seeing as how he's pretty much not seen the field, you're making the assumption that he's a completely different player.  You may be right, but it's an assumption either way.

[incognito_man]

2 minutes ago, Daniel said:

If you say so.  But seeing as how he's pretty much not seen the field, you're making the assumption that he's a completely different player.  You may be right, but it's an assumption either way.

Well, he has seen the (practice) field a LOT. There's value there. And he's received elite coaching. It's not an assumption to believe he's changed. We got a glimpse of live action and we hear first-hand reports from teammates and coaches and media who watch practices. 

I understand that YOU (and essentially everyone) haven't seen him produce in extended live action and I understand nobody is going to go out on a limb for him that isn't a GB fan. Because that's just human nature.

I am almost equally high on Desmond Ridder, for example. I enjoy projecting young players, especially QBs. I think Atlanta is gonna be sneaky good in 2023 and going forward because I think Ridder has "it" just like I think Love does. I couldn't care less about the Falcons, I just call it like I see it. Ditro on Daniel Jones. People think there's a huge QB imbalance in AFC to NFC right now. And I think it's primarily because Hurts, Jones, Ridder and Love are wildly underrated going forward 

[MWil23]

1 hour ago, incognito_man said:

Anything about his college reps are totally irrelevant 4 years later. He's a completely different person and player.

Impossible for any of us fans to say. It's up to him to show that he has overcome those dings from his live game reps since he's had very little live game reps since then.

1 hour ago, incognito_man said:

I 100% agree that live reps are essential for growth.

Yes

1 hour ago, incognito_man said:

I 100% understand he realistically could fall flat on his face.

Yes

1 hour ago, incognito_man said:

But the odds are definitely in his favor. Very clearly the decision makers who understand football think he's ready to step in and be an improvement over Aaron Rodgers value. Otherwise they would have easily just kept Aaron. Aaron wanted to stay in GB and retire here, but our FO and coaching staff just staked their jobs on Jordan Love. When they didn't need to. 

They could believe in a "sunk cost" as well as a point of no return. Maybe the Rodgers situation wasn't salvageable and so they sold to then build around someone else that they never should have drafted in the first place (or perhaps they made the right move, who knows we will find out soon enough). I'd argue that the GM staked his job on Love with this move and doubled down on a stupid draft pick...but it could end up looking brilliant.

I'd argue that they did NEED TO since everyone burned that Rodgers bridge, Aaron included.

1 hour ago, incognito_man said:

Anyone paying attention should go "hm, GB has a really professional and successful FO and they willingly chose to tie their jobs to Jordan Love over Aaron Rodgers when they really didn't have to..." That tells me everything I need to know about what Jordan Love looks like every day as a professional QB.

Make no mistake, I'm not betting against a well run organization...but when you say things like "live reps matter" and that Jordan Love looks like a professional QB in the locker room and practice field in the same breath, that's cause for me to pause a bit.

I don't blame you for being optimistic, but I personally don't think that the "odds are in his favor". I think the odds of replacing back to back HOF QBs with equal level play are sorely stacked against him.

[incognito_man]

23 minutes ago, MWil23 said:

don't blame you for being optimistic, but I personally don't think that the "odds are in his favor". I think the odds of replacing back to back HOF QBs with equal level play are sorely stacked against him

This is an important fallacy in all of this. Jordan Love is legit underrated exactly because fans think it's MORE unlikely he'll succeed because of two guys who played before him. We truly are seeing the gamblers fallacy here. GB rolled snake eyes twice in a row, observers think it's even more unlikely than true odds they'll do it again.