Is It Mike McCarthy or Aaron Rodgers?

[ChampionshipBelt]

I thought this was a very interesting article. Some of us have said we are not sure if it is MM that does not run the ball enough or AR changing the plays at the line. Now, could AR be fudging the truth here? Maybe. But his comments are very interesting. If AR does not have the autonomy we think at changing plays, I think that is a major problem. Maybe this is the reason Rodgers is so frustrated with MM and his offense. Would love to know all your thoughts on this.

Confessions of a Polluted Mindset: A Packers Brain Drain

By Jersey Al (Cheese Head TV)

Rodgers comments: By now, you've all likely heard Aaron Rodgers' aggravated post-game presser after the win over the Bills. Much has been written about him "throwing shade" at Mike McCarthy and/or there being a rift between the two. I personally don't think there is any rift, it was just Rodgers expressing some frustration over a poor performance by the offense, the ultimate responsibility of both McCarthy and Rodgers. Or is it? Let's dig a little deeper...

Anytime I dare to question some of McCarthy's play-calling decisions, I'm reminded in the comments section how it could be Rodgers changing the plays. Well, let's examine what Rodgers said: "Devante should have had 20 targets today. They couldn't stop him. They dared to play one high at times."

At the end of that sentence, he grimaces, shakes his head in a show of disappointment but restrains himself from saying more. His comments and reaction could be indicating they didn't take advantage of opportunities on the field that Buffalo presented to them.

Following up on that topic, Rob Demovsky asked, "how do you get the ball to your playmakers more - by play selection, by reads?" It was a great question, in effect asking Rodgers without saying the words, "can't you just change the play?" Rodgers' answer to the question was a terse "It's by the plan."

So here's a theory to consider: If Rodgers has free reign to change plays at the line of scrimmage (as I keep being told), why didn't he just audible when he saw single high safety? Were his comments hinting at McCarthy's rigid overreliance on specific personnel groups? Was he saying McCarthy had nothing in the Buffalo game plan to run against a single high look? I'm trying to help your cause by listing possible excuses here, but maybe, just maybe, he doesn't have as much autonomy at the line of scrimmage as many think?

 

[Cheesedog]

It's probably both. I don't think Arod has ever been a huge fan of MMs offense after Philbin left the first time.

MM clearly doesn't understand the modern NFL. His game plan shows that. As does his "it's not me it's them my game plan was awesome" type comments he makes when pressed to explain a poor performance.

 

[Mark87]

I thought this was a very interesting article. Some of us have said we are not sure if it is MM that does not run the ball enough or AR changing the plays at the line. Now, could AR be fudging the truth here? Maybe. But his comments are very interesting. If AR does not have the autonomy we think at changing plays, I think that is a major problem. Maybe this is the reason Rodgers is so frustrated with MM and his offense. Would love to know all your thoughts on this.

Confessions of a Polluted Mindset: A Packers Brain Drain

By Jersey Al (Cheese Head TV)

Rodgers comments: By now, you've all likely heard Aaron Rodgers' aggravated post-game presser after the win over the Bills. Much has been written about him "throwing shade" at Mike McCarthy and/or there being a rift between the two. I personally don't think there is any rift, it was just Rodgers expressing some frustration over a poor performance by the offense, the ultimate responsibility of both McCarthy and Rodgers. Or is it? Let's dig a little deeper...

Anytime I dare to question some of McCarthy's play-calling decisions, I'm reminded in the comments section how it could be Rodgers changing the plays. Well, let's examine what Rodgers said: "Devante should have had 20 targets today. They couldn't stop him. They dared to play one high at times."

At the end of that sentence, he grimaces, shakes his head in a show of disappointment but restrains himself from saying more. His comments and reaction could be indicating they didn't take advantage of opportunities on the field that Buffalo presented to them.

Following up on that topic, Rob Demovsky asked, "how do you get the ball to your playmakers more - by play selection, by reads?" It was a great question, in effect asking Rodgers without saying the words, "can't you just change the play?" Rodgers' answer to the question was a terse "It's by the plan."

So here's a theory to consider: If Rodgers has free reign to change plays at the line of scrimmage (as I keep being told), why didn't he just audible when he saw single high safety? Were his comments hinting at McCarthy's rigid overreliance on specific personnel groups? Was he saying McCarthy had nothing in the Buffalo game plan to run against a single high look? I'm trying to help your cause by listing possible excuses here, but maybe, just maybe, he doesn't have as much autonomy at the line of scrimmage as many think?

Jersey Al is an overbearing dick of the highest degree, he and Aaron Nagler and that prick Corey Banke are three big homers with zero clue about anything. He's just sucking Aaron off so he looks good. Aaron audibles at will and that's been confirmed by both he and MM multiple times.

Just for clarification Cheeseheadtv is one of the worst sites you can go to for anything packer ever....can't stress this enough or loud enough.

 

[TW]

Yes. Rodgers can change the plays. But, as Aaron mentioned, the plays he can use in the change are so tightly limited because of the constant "packages" of players on the field, that plays he knows will work can't be run. That's where his frustration is. He seems to feel that McCarthy has restricted it so much that it's difficult to change to a play that will work.

One of Rodgers' unique abilities is to change a play at the line of scrimmage and make something happen. Even though it has been good over the years, with his roll outs, and ad libs, McCarthy wants it stopped. He'd rather lose the play and down instead of making a play he didn't specifically coreograph.

I don't expect anything to change. McCarthy is a micro-manager who won't let anyone make the decisions. They're all on his shoulders.

 

[FlaPack]

Personally Rodgers just needs to shut up and play. If you don’t like the personal package call time out and for damn sakes it’s not like the playbook is limited even within groups.

 

[TW]

Personally Rodgers just needs to shut up and play. If you don’t like the personal package call time out and for damn sakes it’s not like the playbook is limited even within groups.

Sorry! I don't agree. Rodgers has a right to be frustrated, and voice his opinion. If McCarthy or the Packers don't like it, they can bench him, or trade him. We constantly hear McCarthy throwing shade at his players by saying; "We failed to execute!," and everyone knows his "We" in the statement really means his players let him down.

As for using time outs, they are golden. You only use them when you have to, because when they're gone, you can't challenge a call, or stop the clock if you need to, near the end of halves, and it could cost you a game.

And yes, in McCarthy's playbook, way too many plays can't be used with certain personnel packages on the field. He's made each group so specialized that many of them are a total mismatch for other packages. He's a micro-manager and feels that his plays are correct, and is intentionally limiting Aaron's options.

 

[Half Empty]

Jersey Al is an overbearing dick of the highest degree, he and Aaron Nagler and that prick Corey Banke are three big homers with zero clue about anything. He's just sucking Aaron off so he looks good. Aaron audibles at will and that's been confirmed by both he and MM multiple times.

Just for clarification Cheeseheadtv is one of the worst sites you can go to for anything packer ever....can't stress this enough or loud enough.

Oh, go ahead, tell us how you really feel.

 

[FlaPack]

Sorry! I don't agree. Rodgers has a right to be frustrated, and voice his opinion. If McCarthy or the Packers don't like it, they can bench him, or trade him. We constantly hear McCarthy throwing shade at his players by saying; "We failed to execute!," and everyone knows his "We" in the statement really means his players let him down.

As for using time outs, they are golden. You only use them when you have to, because when they're gone, you can't challenge a call, or stop the clock if you need to, near the end of halves, and it could cost you a game.

And yes, in McCarthy's playbook, way too many plays can't be used with certain personnel packages on the field. He's made each group so specialized that many of them are a total mismatch for other packages. He's a micro-manager and feels that his plays are correct, and is intentionally limiting Aaron's options.

First of all I since none of us has intimate details of the Green Bay Packer play book I don't think we can speculate how many plays/packages can be audible/changed. But that said not only does Rodgers have the freedom to change a play he also has the leeway to change protection, and to some extent formations even within the "package". So I do not agree that his options are limited. Now as "we did not execute" I bring one example, Washington game were a wrong route did not but should have resulted in a Pick 6. And I just ask this in general is 12 making the wrong reads? Are WR reading coverage wrong. IMO both come into play. Bottom line he has freedom, and its time he becomes accountable

 

[TW]

First of all I since none of us has intimate details of the Green Bay Packer play book I don't think we can speculate how many plays/packages can be audible/changed. But that said not only does Rodgers have the freedom to change a play he also has the leeway to change protection, and to some extent formations even within the "package". So I do not agree that his options are limited. Now as "we did not execute" I bring one example, Washington game were a wrong route did not but should have resulted in a Pick 6. And I just ask this in general is 12 making the wrong reads? Are WR reading coverage wrong. IMO both come into play. Bottom line he has freedom, and its time he becomes accountable

Wrong. You don't need to have intimate knowledge of their playbook to see what the potential play list consists of based on group personnel. Long after I stated that, the announcers during the game reiterated exactly what I said, and the color man was actually saying what the only viable options were on several plays. It's an indication of exactly what I said, and knowledgeable defensive coordinators and players will catch those keys and make you pay from not being diverse enough.

The announcers even stated, at one point, that the defense could tell within 75% accuracy, on any given down, whether or not the Packers would run or pass, because of their packages.

Now if you want to continue believing that Rodgers, with all his experience with the system, and the routes is the one screwing up, while all these receivers who are obviously out of position when they end up two or three yards apart at the peak of their outs, that's fine.

What makes matters worse is that defenses can either dial up a blitz or fall back into short zone coverage, rushing fewer players, if they feel it's advantageous, and have a fair degree of certainty as to what is about to be run. They can also plug gaps on the line, and button up the outside if they know it's not going to be a pass.

If you believe Rodgers is a jerk, that's fine too. Nobody is giving him a free pass on anything.

 

[FlaPack]

Wrong. You don't need to have intimate knowledge of their playbook to see what the potential play list consists of based on group personnel. Long after I stated that, the announcers during the game reiterated exactly what I said, and the color man was actually saying what the only viable options were on several plays. It's an indication of exactly what I said, and knowledgeable defensive coordinators and players will catch those keys and make you pay from not being diverse enough.

The announcers even stated, at one point, that the defense could tell within 75% accuracy, on any given down, whether or not the Packers would run or pass, because of their packages.

Now if you want to continue believing that Rodgers, with all his experience with the system, and the routes is the one screwing up, while all these receivers who are obviously out of position when they end up two or three yards apart at the peak of their outs, that's fine.

What makes matters worse is that defenses can either dial up a blitz or fall back into short zone coverage, rushing fewer players, if they feel it's advantageous, and have a fair degree of certainty as to what is about to be run. They can also plug gaps on the line, and button up the outside if they know it's not going to be a pass.

If you believe Rodgers is a jerk, that's fine too. Nobody is giving him a free pass on anything.

And I respectfully disagree. And the last people I want breaking down a playbook is a color guy (maybe Romo is the exception). Sure 75% plays you can read by certain keys but that the case with the majority of offenses in the NFL. The real test is creating mismatches even if you can read keys by formation and McVay in LA is fantastic at that. Same look, same formations, but using pre snap motion that a defense can't audible to. He outs coached Zimmer just like that a few weeks ago

The issues on offense are multiple. Poor OL that does not protect, limited running game, pedestrian TE's who are slow and young WR who have issues with route running and getting separation. On top of that a QB who physically is not right and I will argue mentally not right Not an easy fix