"Chips Report" From Loss At Redskins

Brandon Jackson did well and Charlie Peprah performed poorly, but who else earned our weekly designations in the Packers' 13-16 loss to the Washington Redskins?

Our weekly designations from the Green Bay Packers' 13-16 loss to the Washington Redskins...

Blue Chips

  • Brandon Jackson–Had 10 carries for 115 yards, by far his best performance of the season. That's good for an average of 11.5 yards per carry, and sure that's skewed by his one long carry for 71 yards, but take that away and he still had 44 yards on 9 carries, which translates to an above average 4.9 yards per carry. Jackson also led the team in receptions with 5 for 25 yards. It's hard to believe he only got 10 total rushes after having so much success.
  • Desmond Bishop–While filling in for an injured Nick Barnett, Bishop passed his test with flying colors. He's had a few spot starts in the past, but this was probably his best performance as a Green Bay Packer. Bishop has been vocal about wanting more playing time and being open to a trade, and he finally backed all that talk up with a good showing. He had a sack, a pass defensed and two quarterback hits. The fourth-year linebacker also had 10 of his team-leading 13 tackles in the first half when the defense absolutely stuffed the Redskins.

Red Chips

  • Tramon Williams–Williams only finished the game with one tackle, but that doesn't begin to describe how valuable his play was to the Packers both this game and all season long. No matter who he's lined up against, he virtually holds them without a catch week in and week out and today's game was no exception. He also had a 52-yard punt return that set up a Mason Crosby field goal as part of 75 total punt return yards on the day.
  • Clay Matthews–In basically three quarters of play Matthews had 1.5 sacks, 2 tackles for a loss and 3 quarterback hits. There's no telling what he could've ended up with had he not-reinjured his left hamstring. His importance to the success of the defense cannot be understated. He beats double teams and frees up others along the long the scrimmage to put pressure on the quarterback as well. And his play in pass coverage is very underrated. Others considered for red chips were Mike Neal, B.J. Raji and Scott Wells.

Cow Chips

  • Donald Driver–According to ESPN, the Packers had six drops on the day and four of them were courtesy of Driver. He was certainly not alone, but four drops is just not getting the job done. It's part of the reason the Packers only 2 of 13 on converting third downs.
  • Charlie Peprah–Peprah showed flashes of being a very positive contributor, mainly in his run fits and ability to sniff out a screen pass short of the first down. But he also got beat deep on a couple passes, one giving up a touchdown. He may have recovered on Anthony Armstrong's 48-yard touchdown pass, but by then it was too late. When you give up 357 yards through the air, someone's got to be at fault. Others considered for cow chips were Aaron Rodgers, Charles Woodson and Mason Crosby.
0 points

Comments (44)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
bryce's picture

October 10, 2010 at 07:03 pm

How about McCarthy for a cow chip? Terrible coaching, in my opinion.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Ron LC's picture

October 10, 2010 at 08:46 pm

MM play calling is a cow pie.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dgtalmn's picture

October 11, 2010 at 06:31 am

With no filling...brains

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
toby's picture

October 11, 2010 at 11:22 am

Gotta remember, MM didn't drop passes, miss blocks, committ penalties, fumble the football, throw int's, etc.etc.etc.

I am curious how many runs aaron checked out of.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tommyboy's picture

October 10, 2010 at 07:03 pm

Agree on all except Peprah as a cowchip. He showed flashes. I agree he didn't play great, but there were several out there who looked worse than him. The offense was pretty rough. I like McCarthy, I'm not calling for his head. But I give him a cowchip today.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
bigfog's picture

October 10, 2010 at 07:06 pm

All things considered, I'm happy with the way the "fill-ins" played. Bishop was a manimal out there today. Hope they perform better next week. That offense has me worried.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Jersey Al's picture

October 10, 2010 at 07:12 pm

"It's hard to believe he only got 10 total rushes after having so much success." Thanks Mike.

Peprah played as expected. Strong against the run & short passes, a good tackler. Weak one-on-one down the field.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
SpiderPack's picture

October 10, 2010 at 09:34 pm

yeah i agree, its the best performance we could hope for with Peprah.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
SpiderPack's picture

October 10, 2010 at 09:36 pm

(Watched the game delayed about 4hrs)

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
MarkinMadison's picture

October 10, 2010 at 07:15 pm

I wasn't keeping a sheet, and I'm not excusing him, but if you're telling me that Driver had four drops and all of the other WRs combined only had two, that does not sound right to me. Maybe it's in the eye of the scorekeeper as to which ones were drops and which ones were not catchable. Regardless, either they weren't getting open or Rodgers wasn't seeing them. Hard to tell which sometimes on TV.

Raji impresses me more and more every week, like I hoped he would. The defense as a whole fell apart after Matthews went out. The pass rush died, and the secondary was trashed. The only bright spot is that Bigby and Harris will be back in a few weeks.

I know Oppy and others already killed this on the Nagler, but really its time to switch out one or both of the veteran tackles. The young guys will take their lumps, but this team cannot go the distance with the veterans.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
CSS's picture

October 10, 2010 at 07:24 pm

I had the drop count at '9', but I'm probably being hard on Jones. Thought he had a few balls that, despite their placement from Rodgers, should have been caught.

Also, Quarless didn't fight for that end zone ball enough. He should have either caught it (good, I admit) or worked through the defender for the flag.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

October 10, 2010 at 08:38 pm

That throw on 4th and one was bad - (admittedly, Rodgers was rushed) If he puts some air under it, Quarless has a chance. I'm pretty sure it hit the back of the defender.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
CSS's picture

October 10, 2010 at 08:50 pm

Never said it was a good throw and I certainly didn't count it towards the drops. I said Quarless made a half-hearted effort against a defender that was face-guarding. Quarless effort results in a PI or possible catch. Nothing saavy about that play from the rookie TE.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Oppy's picture

October 10, 2010 at 09:17 pm

" Nothing saavy about that play from the rookie TE."

Exactly. That's why you never hear the terms "Green Vet" or "Saavy Rookie".

That said, the defender has the right to position as well, I don't know that Quarless can really "Fight" straight through the defender in any manner legally. I could be wrong, but from the telecast view, it certainly looked like the pass was targeted directly into the back of the defender's helmet, who was directly between the QB and the receiver.

It's entirely possible that Andrew never even got a good look at the ball. Shame that Rodgers didn't have just a split second longer to make that toss.

Also, overall, I was pleasantly surprised by Quarless's overall performance.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
CSS's picture

October 10, 2010 at 09:20 pm

Maybe I have selective memory (very, very possible), but I don't recall the defender turning his head or attempting to make a play on the ball. If Quarless pushes into or over him it's PI.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
packersplanet's picture

October 10, 2010 at 09:55 pm

It hit the defender in the back of the head. That was a horrible pass by Rodgers. Clean play by Washington's D

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
CSS's picture

October 10, 2010 at 09:57 pm

If it hit the defender in the back of the head he wasn't playing the ball. That's face gaurding, right?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

October 10, 2010 at 10:19 pm

Yep - I was looking for the call.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tommer's picture

October 11, 2010 at 12:26 pm

Looking for the flag? Not in a million years. The defender was beat and hustling to get back into position. There were no hands in the face. It was as clean as they come. Aaron underthrew the ball...period.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
CSS's picture

October 11, 2010 at 12:31 pm

Hence my statement: 'If Quarless would have went through the defender and made an effort it would have easily drawn a PI call.'

He made a rookie error and it hurt, period.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tommer's picture

October 11, 2010 at 02:57 pm

I think you're being too hard on Quarless to say it was an 'error'. He was running toward the sideline trying to stay ahead of the defender. He had only a split second to stop and reverse direction. The ball was thrown directly to him. It was not lofted up in the air like a fade pattern. Now you can argue a better athlete could have stopped sooner and moved back to the ball (although I still wouldn't agree). But that's not a rookie error, that's a lack of ability.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
CSS's picture

October 11, 2010 at 03:02 pm

Kevin Seifert on ESPN blog today:

"Quarless, meanwhile, showed some inexperience with a pretty passive play for the ball."

And, Quarless was considered one of the better athletic Tight Ends in the deepest draft class of Tight Ends in decades. He had a questionable history with maturity, but never his athletic ability.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

October 11, 2010 at 03:17 pm

He's a rookie. It happens. And you know what? He looked better in his limited action yesterday than Finley ever looked in his rookie season before the meaningless game in Chicago at the end of the season in 08. If he continues to improve, I think the Pack got themselves a player.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
CSS's picture

October 11, 2010 at 03:20 pm

I agree, and I'm not disparaging him one bit. He's fluid and athletic. But he was all of a rookie on that one play.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tommer's picture

October 11, 2010 at 05:16 pm

Unanimous...Quarless overall is a good addition. Looks like keeping four TEs was a good move.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Nathan Zacher's picture

October 12, 2010 at 06:17 am

Quarless and Rodgers were about equally to blame on that throw. Rodgers was throwing off his back foot and for some reason Quarless was trying to catch while falling backwards.

Either way, should have been able to punch it in before being in that predicament.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Ryeguy812's picture

October 10, 2010 at 07:20 pm

Lost in this debacle was the great play of our undermanned defensive line. Blue chips for Raji, Neal, and Jenkins

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
CSS's picture

October 10, 2010 at 07:22 pm

I have to say, Neal looks like an absolute player. I'm looking forward to seeing more of the kid.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tommer's picture

October 11, 2010 at 12:30 pm

I completely agree. I was looking at the anemic pass rush in the fourth thinking those guys must be gassed having spent the whole game on the field. Could have used Jolly or even Harrell yesterday. Very pleased to see Raji and Neal step up.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
bomdad's picture

October 10, 2010 at 07:25 pm

Rodgers, Matthews, and Woodson need to have red or blue chips each week to win. Simple formula.

Also agree about the drops, because they had seven by the 3rd quarter when counted by people watching in a bar.

Does anyone pay attention to turnovers anymore?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Asshalo's picture

October 10, 2010 at 07:55 pm

I don't know why they didn't run the ball more. I guess they had to ensure they had yet another terrible second half performance on the part of the offense. Yes, they're probably two plays away from being 5-0, but they're not very far away from being 1-4 either.

Sure this team can find it's identity and turn it around, but they're blowing opportunities to win the division and get a first round bye in the playoffs. And that's assuming they do turn it around. This could quickly turn into 2008, where a very talented team always found a way to lose it in the second half.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Shootz's picture

October 10, 2010 at 08:08 pm

Solid analysis, Brian.

I think Crosby had a better showing than his stats reflected, pushing that last kick into the upright was more bad luck than bad kicking.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Neeski's picture

October 10, 2010 at 08:18 pm

Someone please take the game plan and headphones away from Mike McCarthy before he does any more damage!!

Let's see: You know your defensive depth is thin going into the contest, and it's a warm day. Hey maybe it would be nice to try to take some time off the clock by running the football to help during the course of the contest.

At the 12:17 mark of the FIRST quarter you get a 71 yard run....then the rest of the first half you only run the ball FIVE more times!!

Nice twenty-five second possession with about four minutes to go in the first half to allow the opposition another opportunity to get on the board, and seven incomplete passes to close out the half....

Your team’s first half totals: 6 runs, 25 pass attempts and one sack. It would be refreshing if we had a football coach who can scheme winning strategies and not someone who thought he was playing a Madden video game!!

And don't get me started about what happened after halftime....out biggest divisional obstacles aren’t the Bears and Vikings - it's our own (and I'm taking liberty on his job title) Coach (or lack thereof.) I guess the name McCarthy in Wisconsin just carries with it bad karma.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
CSS's picture

October 10, 2010 at 09:01 pm

Interesting in MM's press conference where he said Jackson would have had more attempts/touches but Rodgers had run/pass options and audibled to the pass several times based on the looks Washington gave them.

I would be curious to hear just how many runs Rodgers audibled away from, thus limiting Jackson's touches? When the watch the film will McCarthy/Rodgers feel the option is correct?

I don't see the film, so I have no idea. Maybe Rodgers is trying to assume too much? Maybe his pre-snap reads are correct?

Obviously, the answer is more complex than, 'McCarthy is an idiot.'

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
MarkinMadison's picture

October 11, 2010 at 09:45 am

Didn't see the press confernce, but WTF? Rodgers was out of line last week, so MM should have been smarter this week. If they don't get a bit tighter with their statements we may have a battle between MM and Rodgers being played out the media all year long, which will be horrible for the team.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
CSS's picture

October 11, 2010 at 09:47 am

I didn't get the impression MM was criticizing him by any stretch. If anything, he said it with conviction as to say, 'I trust his judgement'. I would imagine they watch film today and probably agree they were the correct pre-snap reads. Who knows?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
hyperRevue's picture

October 10, 2010 at 08:25 pm

I asked this a couple weeks ago after Nagler posted his "What's wrong with Woodson" article and was quickly and convincingly rebuffed. That said, what the hell is wrong with Greg Jennings?!??!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Ron LC's picture

October 10, 2010 at 08:51 pm

Simple, MM throws him into the teeth of the "cover two" each and every play.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
CSS's picture

October 10, 2010 at 09:13 pm

Nagler -

Do we have any idea how many times per game Rodgers is dealing with a run/pass option play? I was fascinated when, in his press conference, MM indicated there were several times where AR called his own number. Was that the other 6-8 touches or more that Jackson didn't get?

Also, does MM or AR ever discuss the frequency of which AR's pre-snap reads are 'correct' based on what the defense is showing?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
GBKoolAid's picture

October 10, 2010 at 09:51 pm

I thought our JV's fought hard and played well overall against Washington's varsity.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
zub_a_dub's picture

October 10, 2010 at 09:55 pm

You lose your top player (weapon) on offense and a second veteran at the same position ( Finely and Lee), and you continue to go to the pass despite a ground game that broke one for 71 yards and some other very productive runs averaging a respectable 4.4 yards (11.7 if you include the 71 yard run).

You have Bulaga starting, his big weakness as a rookie is his pass blocking, but has shown superior run blocking over Tauscher. Crabtree is your young blocking tight end, not known for the his pass catching replacing Lee and Finely, but also your best blocking tight end. You are loaded with full backs on the team.

Quarless is young and raw (great potential), but not ready for prime time.

Your defense has gotten the injury bug and are weak as far as depth on the defensive line, Pickett just went down and you are weak in your secondary. Yet you still go with a pass game that does nothing for your time of possession, keeping your defense on the field more than they should.

MM is hard headed, can not play the cards he is dealt. If he simply allowed himself to go with the tempo, in stead of fighting it, we win that game hands down. He needs to make adjustments as the game and situations change.

A-rod is incorrect, you don't play your best players, you give the ball to your hottest and the ones that are on a roll despite the game plan.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
SpiderPack's picture

October 10, 2010 at 11:18 pm

Well, I've read all the blogs, it was a great display of pass offense, Bjax had several holes to run thru, "Problem" is:

Our amazing offense has absorbed the RB loss. They can easily make the play calls to move the offense. Congratulations to all of them. And they will to continue to do that in classy, almost invisible form. But just like I said shortly after the RGrant loss, ROGERS WILL BE BRILLIANT BUT IT WILL BE A STRUGGLE ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE SEASON. I hope they win more than they lose.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Josh's picture

October 11, 2010 at 08:40 am

The offensive plan did not attack the weaknesses of Washington's D. They didn't have Haynesworth-who has been very good at playing DT for them. The excuse that Rodgers changed some plays that were meant for Jackson is a lie. Jackson was pulled out of the game in favor of Kuhn after his good plays. If the option is run with Kuhn or pass, you should pass.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PackRat's picture

October 11, 2010 at 10:50 am

Three thoughts:

We've been spoiled by Clay Mathews to think we have a dominating defense. When CMIII goes down we live in fear despite having three "all-world" DBs: Collins, Woodson and "shut-down" Williams.

We have three receivers doing the same thing and have morphed Jennings into a cover2 decoy. Jennings became Jennings by turning 8 yard crossing patterns into first downs and more. IMHO its because we love DD, his leadership and all he has meant to the franchise. James Jones and Jordy Nelson should be running Driver's routes and a guy sprinting 4.2s into the cover 2 should be replace the useles route MM has Jennings running. It just didn't show because Finley became the 10-15 yard beast.

3) Julius Peppers, Antrelle Rolle, Ernie Sims, Karlos Dansby, Dunta Robinson, Kyle Vanden Bosch, Kirk Morrison, Elvis Dumervil--I mean, would just one kill you TT?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0

Log in to comment and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.