Cheese Curds: Green Bay Packers Updates

[Krauser]

39 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

Rodgers hasn't quite been the same the last couple of years.  If you want to blame it on Barr breaking him, so be it.  But Rodgers has left throws on the field, and it's been well documented.  There's till more arm talent there than the majority of the QBs in the NFL, but he's clearly lost a bit.

I know he's dropped off. But he's still an elite talent. Even in recent years, Rodgers at his best is something most other QBs can never reach.

Quote

But imagine having a QB who can run an offense to perfection.  We're talking about something akin to what the Packers had in the McCarthy/Rodgers peak era.  

Sure, but the peak (2009-14) wasn't just the system. The supporting cast was excellent and Rodgers was elite.

Even past that peak, in recent years the Packers have repeatedly been elevated by Rodgers at his best, especially in situations where it matters most -- playoffs games vs Cards in 2015, Cowboys 2016 and Seahawks 2019 would not have gone nearly as well for GB if they had a Goff/Garoppolo at QB. 

As a Vikings fan, I'm much less worried about a Packers team led by a competent but non-elite NFL starter (if Love even develops that well) playing in a good system than even the older and inconsistent version of Aaron Rodgers.

47 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

Look at what the Saints have done the last couple of years.

The Saints didn't trade up in the 1st round to draft a replacement for Brees! 

Brees' late career arc has little bearing on Rodgers in Green Bay, if the Packers are moving on from him within 2 years. If GB thought Rodgers was capable of that sort of late career success, there's no way they would be planning to move on from him. 

I just can't imagine that Love in a better executed Lafleur system will actually be an upgrade from Rodgers in any system, especially if he'd been given a couple of additional weapons this year. 

[vike daddy]

Before the draft, Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers had been making periodic appearances on Twitter. Since Wednesday, April 22, Rodgers has disappeared. Rodgers has had nothing to say, on social media or elsewhere, since the Packers traded up four spots to select quarterback Jordan Love last Thursday, since they made a pair of picks aimed at bolstering the running game on Friday, and since they emerged from Saturday with no receivers drafted.

But that hasn’t kept him from making his thoughts known, indirectly. Rodgers spoke to his Green Bay predecessor, Brett Favre, and Favre then made multiple radio appearances on Wednesday. Favre also did a regular spot on SiriusXM NFL Radio.

Favre: “Aaron and I have a great relationship, and we talked about it. Obviously, he’s a little disappointed. To me, the word ‘disrespect’ I think is perfect, that’s the message that it sends to Aaron.”

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2020/04/30/brett-favre-aaron-rodgers-feels-like-the-odd-man-out/

 

 

you know you have a schism when Favre is the voice of reason....

Edited May 1, 2020 by vike daddy

[Purplepride323]

Damn, it doesn’t feel real. The Vikings had arguably the best draft (though it’s too early to tell) and the Packers had the worst. Even if Jordan Love is who they think he is, he most likely won’t be playing until 2024. Also the rest of the draft was just as bad. I don’t think they hit on one pick. Rodgers must be heated right now. I’d be surprised if he plays out his contract with the Packers. Maybe he gets traded to the Jets and then signs as a free agent with the Vikings in 2024. 😂 

Edited May 1, 2020 by Purplepride323

[vikes635]

17 minutes ago, Purplepride323 said:

Damn, it doesn’t feel real. The Vikings had arguably the best draft (though it’s too early to tell) and the Packers had the worst. Even if Jordan Love is who they think he is, he most likely won’t be playing until 2024. Also the rest of the draft was just as bad. I don’t think they hit on one pick. Rodgers must be heated right now. I’d be surprised if he plays out his contract with the Packers. Maybe he gets traded to the Jets and then signs as a free agent with the Vikings in 2024. 😂 

I think Dillon is going to be a vary good complementary back to Jones. I'm thinking Williams is going to get allot less touches this year. Martin the LB they drafted late fits what they want out of their LBs and will be considered a hit IMO.

[CriminalMind]

More touches for Jones\Dillion\Williams and less for Rogers, sounds like a plan I can get behind

[VikeManDan]

12 hours ago, CriminalMind said:

More touches for Jones\Dillion\Williams and less for Rogers, sounds like a plan I can get behind

Considering this team had the ball run down their throats when it counted most I wouldn't be so sure. 

[CWood21]

On 4/30/2020 at 9:20 PM, Purplepride323 said:

Damn, it doesn’t feel real. The Vikings had arguably the best draft (though it’s too early to tell) and the Packers had the worst. Even if Jordan Love is who they think he is, he most likely won’t be playing until 2024. Also the rest of the draft was just as bad. I don’t think they hit on one pick. Rodgers must be heated right now. I’d be surprised if he plays out his contract with the Packers. Maybe he gets traded to the Jets and then signs as a free agent with the Vikings in 2024. 😂 

Not much of a chance that the Packers keep Love (and more importantly his rookie contract) on the bench for 4 years.  He's probably set to be the starting QB in 2022.  2023 at the very latest.

[CWood21]

On 4/30/2020 at 1:33 PM, Krauser said:

Sure, but the peak (2009-14) wasn't just the system. The supporting cast was excellent and Rodgers was elite.

Even past that peak, in recent years the Packers have repeatedly been elevated by Rodgers at his best, especially in situations where it matters most -- playoffs games vs Cards in 2015, Cowboys 2016 and Seahawks 2019 would not have gone nearly as well for GB if they had a Goff/Garoppolo at QB. 

As a Vikings fan, I'm much less worried about a Packers team led by a competent but non-elite NFL starter (if Love even develops that well) playing in a good system than even the older and inconsistent version of Aaron Rodgers.

It was the system PLUS the weapons.  The offensive system that's being moved to is relying less on Rodgers' pure arm talent and more about making sure you're keeping the offense moving forward.  It's a bad idea because it's gone away from what the Packers have done offensively the last few years.  I get it, it's not the sexy draft even if it's productive.  Rodgers can absolutely thrive within the offense.  But Rodgers has played very feast or famine with the offense.  The Packers were 23rd in offense on 3rd down, the 49ers were 5th.  The Packers were not an efficient offense in large part because Rodgers left a LOT of throws on the field.  If you want to play feast or famine offensively, go right ahead.

On 4/30/2020 at 1:33 PM, Krauser said:

The Saints didn't trade up in the 1st round to draft a replacement for Brees! 

Brees' late career arc has little bearing on Rodgers in Green Bay, if the Packers are moving on from him within 2 years. If GB thought Rodgers was capable of that sort of late career success, there's no way they would be planning to move on from him. 

I just can't imagine that Love in a better executed Lafleur system will actually be an upgrade from Rodgers in any system, especially if he'd been given a couple of additional weapons this year. 

You're missing the ENTIRETY of the post.  You're fixating on the Love selection.  This is about getting into an efficient offense.  The Packers left a LOT of throws on the field by Rodgers.  Could his lack of weapons hindered him?  Absolutely, but this was a guy who missed open WRs.  It's been well documented.  The Saints have rebuilt their offense with reestablishing the run game, and it's taken the offensive load off of Drew Brees.  And the Saints have won at a higher rate than when Brees was throwing the ball 600+ times.  Why?   Is Brees not a great QB?

[Purplepride323]

13 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

Not much of a chance that the Packers keep Love (and more importantly his rookie contract) on the bench for 4 years.  He's probably set to be the starting QB in 2022.  2023 at the very latest.

For that to happen Rodgers would have to be traded. We’ll have to wait & see what happens with that situation. Hopefully he gets traded to the Jets and signs with us as a free agent in 2024 lol.

Edited May 2, 2020 by Purplepride323

[Krauser]

31 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

The offensive system that's being moved to is relying less on Rodgers' pure arm talent and more about making sure you're keeping the offense moving forward

In other words, relying more on players who aren't that good, instead of the one player who's truly elite.

31 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

 Rodgers can absolutely thrive within the offense.

I disagree. At least since late 2014, Rodgers has refused to color within the lines consistently. At his best, he's a genius, but he knows it, and he insists on showing off. 

I don't think Rodgers is going to settle for being a late career Brady or Brees -- efficient within the scheme. He wants to run around and throw a 55 yarder off his back foot. Hero ball.

31 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

But Rodgers has played very feast or famine with the offense.  The Packers were 23rd in offense on 3rd down, the 49ers were 5th.  The Packers were not an efficient offense in large part because Rodgers left a LOT of throws on the field

I know they weren't good. They haven't been good for several years now. I've been documenting the decline since 2015 (which at the time Packers fans on this forum told me wasn't happening). 

My point is that GB's offense might be better if they gave Aaron Rodgers a few more weapons and let him try to play at the ceiling of his talent, instead of asking him to restrain himself so they can get by with Davante Adams and bits of string and bubblegum at receiver. 

The Kubiak/Shanahan system is fine for limited but reliable QBs like Garoppolo and Cousins. But the Packers have Aaron Rodgers, so why would you want to play that game?

31 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

The Saints have rebuilt their offense with reestablishing the run game, and it's taken the offensive load off of Drew Brees.  And the Saints have won at a higher rate than when Brees was throwing the ball 600+ times.  Why?

Pass / run balance is mostly about game scripts. The Saints have been winning a lot since 2017 so they run a lot. 

The Saints are not an "establish the run" offense. In close games situations (score within 7 points either way), they had the 7th highest pass rate in the NFL last year, at 62%. Packers were 13th at 60%, NFL average is 58%. 

Much of the Saints pass game is quick, short throws to backs, TEs and possession receivers.

GB doesn't have great personnel for that scheme: no real YAC threats except Aaron Jones (who probably leaves after this year), and no clear answers at TE. And Rodgers has never been wiling to throw short early, preferring to hold the ball and look for the home run downfield. So the change in scheme does suggest that his days are numbered in Green Bay. 

I think Lafleur is trying to set up something closer to the Niners or Titans than the Saints: a run first offense with the QB working on time, only occasionally throwing deep off play action.  Could the Packers develop a Shanahan-style offense like that around Love and outdo the rest of the NFC in the years to come? Sure, it's possible.

But the truth is, the Packers roster hasn't been very good for several years -- without Rodgers they'd have been under .500 since about 2015. So for Vikings fans and anyone else who's tired of watching a Packers QB pull off miracles to win big games, seeing the back of Rodgers' career in Green Bay seems like very good news.

 

Edited May 2, 2020 by Krauser

[CWood21]

10 minutes ago, Krauser said:

In other words, relying more on players who aren't that good, instead of the one player who's truly elite.

Rodgers isn't elite.  He's damn good, but this isn't elite Rodgers.  Elite Rodgers was 2009-2014.

11 minutes ago, Krauser said:

I disagree. At least since late 2014, Rodgers has refused to color within the lines consistently. At his best, he's a genius, but he knows it, and he insists on showing off. 

I don't think Rodgers is going to settle for being a late career Brady or Brees -- efficient within the scheme. He wants to run around and throw a 55 yarder off his back foot. Hero ball.

If you can get Rodgers to buy into throwing to his receivers, it actually makes a TON of sense.  I believe there's a quote from Rodgers talking about how this was the most fun offense that he had played in years.  If Brees can do it, why can't Rodgers?

14 minutes ago, Krauser said:

I know they weren't good. They haven't been good for several years now. I've been documenting the decline since 2015 (which at the time Packers fans on this forum told me wasn't happening). 

My point is that GB's offense might be better if they gave Aaron Rodgers a few more weapons and let him try to play at the ceiling of his talent, instead of asking him to restrain himself so they can get by with Davante Adams and bits of string and bubblegum at receiver. 

The Kubiak/Shanahan system is fine for limited but reliable QBs like Garoppolo and Cousins. But the Packers have Aaron Rodgers, so why would you want to play that game?

Then why has Brees been able to adapt to a "new" offensive system, but Rodgers can't?  You want to blame the weapons and think Rodgers should play hero ball.  There's a blueprint of success both in terms of the 49ers' offensive system AND the Saints committing to reestablishing their ability to run the ball.  But instead, you're hitching the wagon to what worked for the Packers a half a decade ago.  There's no reason why Rodgers couldn't have success in this type of offense.

17 minutes ago, Krauser said:

Pass / run balance is mostly about game scripts. The Saints have been winning a lot since 2017 so they run a lot. 

The Saints are not an "establish the run" offense. In close games situations (score within 7 points either way), they had the 7th highest pass rate in the NFL last year, at 62%. Packers were 13th at 60%, NFL average is 58%. 

Much of the Saints pass game is quick, short throws to backs, TEs and possession receivers.

GB doesn't have great personnel for that scheme: no real YAC threats except Aaron Jones (who probably leaves after this year), and no clear answers at TE. And Rodgers has never been wiling to throw short early, preferring to hold the ball and look for the home run downfield. So the change in scheme does suggest that his days are numbered in Green Bay. 

I think Lafleur is trying to set up something closer to the Niners or Titans than the Saints: a run first offense with the QB working on time, only occasionally throwing deep off play action.  Could the Packers develop a Shanahan-style offense like that around Love and outdo the rest of the NFC in the years to come? Sure, it's possible.

But the truth is, the Packers roster hasn't been very good for several years -- without Rodgers they'd have been under .500 since about 2015. So for Vikings fans and anyone else who's tired of watching a Packers QB pull off miracles to win big games, seeing the back of Rodgers' career in Green Bay seems like very good news.

Go look at the win percentage of the Saints the last few years, and compare it to when Brees was throwing 600+ times a season.  They've been wildly successful with Brees shouldering less of the load.  By your logic, the Saints did Brees dirty.  The Saints have only drafted TWO skill position in the first three rounds of the last three years (Tre'Quan Smith at 91 in 2018 and Adam Trautman at 104).  Yet nobody is complaining that the Saints haven't given him enough weapons.

[Krauser]

31 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

Go look at the win percentage of the Saints the last few years, and compare it to when Brees was throwing 600+ times a season.  They've been wildly successful with Brees shouldering less of the load.

It’s the other way around. They throw less because they’re playing with a lead all the time. The stats show they’re pass-first in score neutral situations.

31 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

Elite Rodgers was 2009-2014.

Sure, he’s past his peak. But he’s still a damn sight better at his best than the Tannehill / Garoppolo / Cousins tier. All of the Packers playoff wins since 2015 are thanks to Rodgers.

31 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

Then why has Brees been able to adapt to a "new" offensive system, but Rodgers can't?

I don’t know for sure, I’m not his psychologist.

To me, the Hero myth around Rodgers starts in 2013, when the team struggles badly without him before he comes back and miraculously wins the division in Chicago. Then in 2014, he’s limping late in the season and almost beats the defending champs in Seattle. In 2015 the supporting cast is terrible after Jordy gets hurt but he still drags them to the playoffs thanks to the Hail Mary in Detroit, and then takes the Cards to OT in the playoffs after driving 90 yards on 2 plays in 10 seconds. 2016 is RELAX and run the table, which only happens because Rodgers has the best stretch of his late career. Beats the NFC 1 seed Cowboys with a phenomenal game especially the sideline pass to Jared Cook. In 2017 the team isn’t great but they win a couple of close games so fans insist that they would have been a contender if Rodgers hadn’t been hurt. 2018 is a mess, McCarthy gets fired. 2019, Rodgers has a few great moments, including the win over the Seahawks in the playoffs, but the offense doesn’t work great except for his 3rd down and red zone heroics. They ride a favorable schedule and points differential to a somewhat inflated 13 win season, but get killed in the NFCCG. 

With a track record like that, it’s no wonder Rodgers buys into his own hype. And it’s amazing that a Packers fan could think the team would be better off by limiting Rodgers to a smaller role.

Brees was always more of an efficient and accurate QB than a Godlike genius. I don’t think the Saints scheme changed so dramatically — the main change in 2017 was that the defense got better so they didn’t have to try to win every game in a shootout.

In any case, it’s almost a moot point if Rodgers can or will adapt to the new offense. The Love pick clearly shows his days are numbered in Green Bay. I guess they’ll probably try to trade him after this year, if they can make the cap situation work. 

I don’t think that change will make the Packers better.

Edited May 2, 2020 by Krauser

[Leader]

On 4/30/2020 at 2:33 PM, Krauser said:

I just can't imagine that Love in a better executed Lafleur system will actually be an upgrade from Rodgers in any system, especially if he'd been given a couple of additional weapons this year. 

Long post...finally got to to what matters ^

AR didnt execute the system well last year. Besides some issues with his fundamentals/execution etc -that he's been exhibiting for a few years now,  he didnt work the offense the way its designed. Greg Cosell said it straight in his Rich Eisen interview: AR was leaving plays on the field. Far too often he just wasnt throwing the ball on time/schedule or in rhythm. 

Now - you're GBs GM - what do you do?

You've got a living legend on your roster thats cost prohibitive to move on from and who (by performance as well as appearance...) isnt performing up to his old standards and also doesnt seem inclined to let the old days of "winging it" quite go.

It's deemed by those who's job it is to make these decisions that Love has the foundations of what it takes. I applaud the decision.

Nobody's kicking AR to the curb. Far from it. But the only reason we welcome competition in every position group other than QB is their contract. 

Now if AR slips further....the organization is protected.

[Krauser]

44 minutes ago, Leader said:

AR was leaving plays on the field. Far too often he just wasnt throwing the ball on time/schedule or in rhythm. 

Now - you're GBs GM - what do you do?

Well, if it were up to me, I’d build an offense around Rodgers’ strengths, instead of trying to fit a superstar shaped peg into a square hole. 

They could have added weapons to give Rodgers more options when he extends plays, instead of using almost all of their top picks on DBs (many of whom have been disappointing) and a top 12 pick on a project edge rusher like Rashan Gary.

GB hasn’t added a good receiver since Adams in 2014, and Jenkins last year was the first good OL they’ve added over a similar time frame. The WR2 is either Funchess or Lazard, neither of whom would likely start for 20 teams in the league. 

And the OL is getting worse. Bulaga is gone, and Linsley is probably in his last year. The right side of the line will be Turner/Wagner. Bakh is great but he’s 29 this year and needs a new contract, which is probably worth around $20M per year.

Rodgers has been the glue that keeps the offense at least respectable. He makes the OL look better because he’s so good at manipulating angles in the pocket. He makes the run game better because he checks out of run calls against heavy boxes. He adds value with hard counts and quick snaps to get defensive penalties and free plays.  He knows how to sell a roughing the passer call. He makes smart decisions when to scramble. He’s accurate and can make difficult throws off platform. And he’s amazing when the chips are down: 3rd and long, red zone, late game situations.

And sure, he’s worse than he used to be and he isn’t perfect and he isn’t running the golden boy LaFleur’s scheme perfectly, which is basically the same scheme that half a dozen teams with better supporting casts than the Packers are running. 

But the net result of Rodgers being Rodgers is a massive, massive plus for GB. They’ve won a lot of games because of him. 

And now, yes, he is being kicked to the curb. Trading up to take a QB in the 1st round is an unmistakeable signal that the team has decided to move on. The only thing to work out is the timing and the price for making the change. But the writing’s on the wall.

Maybe you won’t know what you’ve got til it’s gone.

Edited May 2, 2020 by Krauser

[vike daddy]

24 minutes ago, Krauser said:

Maybe you won’t know what you’ve got til it’s gone.

put up a parking lot.