Packers Vs.Texans - 3 Plays that make you go Hmmm

Jersey Al picks out three thought-provoking plays from Sunday's game against the Saints

After re-watching the Packers game, here are three plays that made me go hmmm, for various reasons.

This shall now be known as "the play that always works" (when Jace doesn't drop it). The Packers have run slight variations of this play a bunch of times, in both directions, with various pass catchers. This is the first time they used it on the goal line, but wherever and whenever they run it, it's worked beautifully. Except for the very first time in the Vikings game, when Jace Sternberger dropped a perfect pass that hit him in the hands.

 

Marquez, Marquez, Marquez. As much as Rodgers tried to talk him up and build his confidence in camp, that can't help him with his fundamental techniques. Look at the poor hand placement as he tries to catch this ball. It's like he's flailing at the ball.

 

Since I don't have early access to the All-22 film, I'm going to cheat for this one and use this tweet by Ben Fennell. I don't agree with Ben that a better throw would have resulted in a TD - Tonyan would have had 40-50 yds more to run with the safety fast approaching. Regardless, this play design is just an absolute thing of beauty. 

 

__________________________

"Jersey Al" Bracco is the Editor-In-Chief, part owner and wearer of many hats for CheeseheadTV.com and PackersTalk.com. He is also a recovering Mason Crosby truther.  Follow Al on twitter at @JerseyalGBP

8 points

Comments (72)

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

October 27, 2020 at 10:22 am

On the MVS one I don’t think the cause is his hands at all: that is a symptom. I think it’s reaching for the ball from a bad position that results in that from my experience. Is the ball where it should be? I think possibly, but the position of the defender and or the way MVS avoids him taking to long resulted in the lack of timing. These things happen. In many ways one could credit that the the corner getting in the right place to block a throw behind on the outside.

I agree the Tonyan catch is not a guaranteed TD. I did think we showed a little more variety in the red zone last Sunday. That is something that is welcome.

+ REPLY
6 points
6
0
Branden Burke's picture

October 27, 2020 at 11:18 am

The ball was where it was supposed to be. It was thrown before MVS broke his route. But the fact that we see this play being made regularly and effortlessly between rodgers and Adams tells me the issue isnt usually rodgers. Routes have to be ran precisely every time. Any unnecessary half steps, rounding cuts, changes in stride length at speed effects timing. rodgers is trusting MVS to run his routes to perfection. He is putting it where he wants him to be away from the defender. If mvs went a half step too far, he's a split second slower and it makes the catch (which was thrown before he breaks down for the cut) more difficult and you get this play here. Regardless of the imperfection, a solid WR has a pretty good chance of making that catch. Are there any recent solid contributors at wr for the packers that you don't think is making that catch? Jennings, driver, cobb, Jordy, james Jones, Adams are making that catch regularly.

If you can't play QB with anticipation, you lose the entire advantage of the offense knowing the play. The cuts cause the separation. If you can't throw anticipating the cuts due to a lack of consistent route running/timing, the defense has time to react and the offense looks like it did the past few years. Holding the ball waiting for something to open.

+ REPLY
1 points
3
2
Coldworld's picture

October 27, 2020 at 11:26 am

MVS isn’t Adams, one of the best receivers in the game. Moreover not every pass to Adams works. Moreover, not all that long ago their were loud calls for Adams and before that Jones to be run out of town for lousy hands.

In any case, my point was on one play, gave credit to the Defender, noted that MVS’s body was not in the right place and simply pointed to that being the cause. Neither you or I know whether the pass was right or if MVS made a route mistake. If your point is that MVS isn’t Adams as he is today, then pretty obviously true.

+ REPLY
2 points
6
4
Branden Burke's picture

October 27, 2020 at 12:19 pm

MVS isn't Adams. But neither are tonyan or lazzard. I would have significantly more faith in them to make that play. Outside of an occasional catch here and there, the only consistency MVS has shown us is that he consistently fails to get the job done.

+ REPLY
2 points
4
2
Coldworld's picture

October 28, 2020 at 08:10 am

Lol, so there are only two grades between a WR 3 and a top 5 receiver? There is no response to the development curve if Adams? To the fact that teams are holding safeties deep? Enough said and time spent.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

October 28, 2020 at 04:17 am

Do you think it is odd that MVS spins and then appears to react to the ball thrown as an out? It looks like MVS almost ran a stop. If he runs a straight forward out he is there before the ball gets there. Here he appears to lunge for it.

IDK. It just looks odd to me.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Coldworld's picture

October 28, 2020 at 08:10 am

Agree.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
NoNonsense's picture

October 27, 2020 at 12:00 pm

What was the route he was supposed to run there? A comeback route, a dig route, a curl, a stick route or was it supposed to be a pivot route.

Rodgers threw the ball like MVS was supposed to break outside not inside. If he was supposed to turn inside, then Rodgers throw was way off. MVS is 6'4" and hes almost completely stretched out for that ball. Not a terrible drop IMO but maybe a miscommunication or incorrect route adjustment.

I dont know if its MVS, I guess we just have to assume it is but most of the time Rodgers is throwing an uncatchable ball to MVS, no where near him. Especially the deep balls. If hes not WIDE open, its like Rodgers doesnt trust him to put it in a catchable area.

If he doesnt trust him to be in the right spot or to come down with a 50-50 ball then start using him as the jet motion guy or something. Have him run the Sternberger play, get him the ball in space on short crisp routes or crossing patterns.

And while I'm at it. Can LaFluer just put AJ Dillon in the I formation and give him a head of steam before he gets the ball. Having him get the ball from a dead stop in the Pistol formation isnt even close to the best way to utilize this guy. I get that it's the offense they run but why draft a big bruiser like that if your not gonna put him in the best position to succeed?

+ REPLY
3 points
4
1
Branden Burke's picture

October 27, 2020 at 12:51 pm

Even if that was the right route, and the defender played that route perfectly, it was still open. And it was put in the open place where only his guy could get it. Missing on those happen sometimes. But guys who aren't future car salesmen step up and make those plays with some consistency. It's not fair in the NFL, but he is running out of time here. And very few guys that have played their way out of green bay have found success elsewhere. Janis, abbredaris, trevor davis, j'mon Moore, and Michael clark are all recent receivers who are sitting at home. MVS is on the precipice of needing a new career. Even janis, who played and caught the ball better and was elite on special teams, saw that same fate. The amount of snaps and opportunities he has had is almost unfathomable. They are begging him to figure it out. But it isn't happening and isn't much there to indicate it will.

+ REPLY
-1 points
1
2
Coldworld's picture

October 28, 2020 at 08:14 am

No, it wasn’t just open. Ended up having to reach around the defender. As long as MVS holds safeties he has real value that none of those have. It’s really not a complicated concept.

+ REPLY
1 points
2
1
Branden Burke's picture

October 29, 2020 at 10:16 am

The corner is on the inside. At no point did he reach around the defender. There was over 2 yards of separation where the ball was thrown to. They didn't even make contact on the play. Could the ball have been put a little closer? Ya. Does that mean it was ran how it was supposed to be ran? We don't know.

But when targeting Adams, rodgers has a QB rating of 120 even with two picks. It's 157 when targeting lazzard. It's 154 when targeting tonyan. It's 104 when targeting jones, and 100 when targeting williams. Its a 78 when targeting MVS. It's hard to think it's always rodgers when everyone else he throws to is succeeding. Also, I don't think I disagree with anything you said. I've actually thumbed up a few of them. Just giving my observation on it. I want to see the kid succeed. It's just not happening.

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
fordguy's picture

October 27, 2020 at 04:19 pm

The thing I see with the play to MVS is not so much the route but is his catching form. He doesn't even come close to catching the ball with both hands.

And yes, Lacy was a little porky but ran the ball hard. Dillon has got to start running behind his shoulders because right now he isn't running like a
250 lb running back.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

October 28, 2020 at 04:20 am

I should have read your comment before posting. The route looks weird to me.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
canadapacker's picture

October 27, 2020 at 08:39 pm

I just re-watched the game again - MVS didnt drop the ball on two of the passes that I saw- the one he got his hands on was high and would have been a great catch. The other pass that I saw was uncatchable. AR did not have a really accurate game with his passes - like in the first game or two- he missed Adams a couple of times. Once a pass was behind was deflected and we were lucky it wasnt picked. On some of Adams catches even the announcers said he would have gone along way but the pass was low. Tonyan might have gone to the house if the long pass that he caught was caught in stride instead he had to dive for it.

+ REPLY
1 points
2
1
Leatherhead's picture

October 27, 2020 at 10:25 am

The Play That Always Works has an early man in motion to clear it out, the we sell the run (Rodgers is really smooth at this) then the receiver goes right into the cleared out space. This is slick.

MSV. This is MSV’s moment. It’s his 3rd season and other WRs are hurt. We don’t need him to make leaping grabs downfield, but he has to catchthefrickinball on a short out that he gets his hands on, and if he can’t, then we can’t throw it to him.

Tonyan. This is Tonyan‘s moment. It’s his 3rd season and he’s making key catches for big plays. We should maybe throw it to him more..

+ REPLY
5 points
6
1
Guam's picture

October 27, 2020 at 10:32 am

I have been rooting for MVS for some time, but I am just not seeing any improvement despite 2.5 years in the league. Whether it is his hands or other issues, he simply doesn't come down with the ball often enough. I doubt the Packers have any legitimate options other than MVS this year and his speed does put deep pressure on the safeties, however I am coming to believe his days with the Packers are numbered. That is too bad because there certainly has been an opportunity opposite Adams (#2 WR) for some time now and no one has been able to reliably fill that spot. Lazard has looked good when healthy, but that leaves the Packers with no real deep threat at WR.

Given MLF's scheme the need for a great #2 is minimized, but that spot shouldn't be a weakness in a passing league with an HOF QB.

+ REPLY
5 points
6
1
Leatherhead's picture

October 27, 2020 at 11:00 am

Lazard is a deep threat. Ask the Saints.

If we can’t throw it to MVS, we might as well put another OT out there with an eligible number.. I wonder how many snaps Shepherd gets because I think MVS is going to be on the bench more. We’ve been really hit with injuries at WR and MVS has been the only guy to stay healthy so far.

+ REPLY
2 points
3
1
Coldworld's picture

October 27, 2020 at 11:28 am

MVS will continue to get snaps as long as defenses play to defend him. Once they don’t, he either capitalizes or the threat goes away and he loses snaps.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Branden Burke's picture

October 27, 2020 at 01:13 pm

Tampa didn't play to MVS. They played to Adams and sold out on the run. I would make MVS show me that we need to respect him. I'm playing him soft because he is statistically a negative player for the offense. A drive killer. Tampa smothered everything short that game and brought the heat. MVS needed to be that antidote in 1 v 1 coverage but he was invisible.

+ REPLY
4 points
5
1
4thand10's picture

October 27, 2020 at 01:44 pm

This^

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
Leatherhead's picture

October 27, 2020 at 03:06 pm

I don't believe a 28 point loss is because our #2 WR isn't good enough. I'd look for another explanation, like, perhaps we didn't protect our QB well enough. It seems like when he's protected, we score lots of points and he never turns it over.

+ REPLY
1 points
3
2
HighPlainsDrifter's picture

October 28, 2020 at 05:17 am

We get it Pulp. You hate MVS. That is evident by your five+ comments here, as well as countless others containing clever insults like "future used car salesman" you have littered across CHTV.

Your ability to evaluate talent and analyze wide receiver play really is uncanny. You should offer your services to the Packers as a scout or a passing game consultant. I'm sure you believe that you know more than professional football people.

+ REPLY
-1 points
2
3
Coldworld's picture

October 28, 2020 at 08:17 am

If you have nothing to say and no arguments to support it, one post is more than enough.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Coldworld's picture

October 28, 2020 at 08:26 am

Lol, you want deep plays for a QB who can’t set his feet or get any time? You either didn’t watch the game or have about as much of a clue about football as you don’t have an obsession about MVS.

If anyone thinks the strategy we should have adopted against that rush in Tampa was to buy time for deep routes I assume you are dying to see our back up QBs play a lot more.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Guam's picture

October 27, 2020 at 03:31 pm

Every receiver gets one deep occasionally - that doesn't make them a deep threat that DC's have to scheme for. Lazard is a good receiver but he is no speedster. Same issue with Adams - great receiver but not a burner. Given the available options, MLF is going to have to lean on his RBs and TEs for more production. Another OT with an eligible number and Dillion running out of the I formation would be fun to watch. Haven't seen that in the NFL for a long time.

+ REPLY
1 points
2
1
Leatherhead's picture

October 27, 2020 at 07:35 pm

You can get deep on people without being a burner, especially if you’re smart and tricky. Ask Jordy Nelson. Hell, Tonyan gets behind people.

We played 3 OTs in 2003 in the U71 Bacon Formation, but we didn’t give an eligible number. We could have.

I love the idea of going big and running over people.

+ REPLY
-1 points
1
2
Coldworld's picture

October 28, 2020 at 08:20 am

People can get behind for a variety of reasons due to scheme and the defensive counter, but it’s the ability to get behind based on speed that really changes formations and gives others less or less able coverage. That increases the chances those around them will get free of coverage.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
flackcatcher's picture

October 27, 2020 at 09:53 pm

I like Lazard, but that was a blown coverage on the Saints secondary. (Or good play call on MLF part) Either way, Lazard had a clear shot to the end zone. On MVS his breaks at the LOS are lightening quick. He always gets an extra half yard off the LOS by the DB. As my friend (AFC front office guy said) "he's too quick for Rodgers in running his route tree." MVS hands are not an issue here, nor is his understanding of the offense. This is strictly a timing issue between the two. MVS has already 'geared down' his route running this season according to my friend. This is where the preseason would have really helped those two.

+ REPLY
-1 points
1
2
coolhand's picture

October 27, 2020 at 11:09 am

I don't think Tonyan would have scored a TD, but a better throw would have added 20 more yards to that play. A Rod was just a little off on Sunday and just missing open receivers in stride.

+ REPLY
2 points
3
1
Point-Packer's picture

October 27, 2020 at 11:38 am

I'll take a "little off" Rodgers over 25 other starting QBs in the league.

As to MVS, he's not a good WR or a #2 or #3 WR. He's a speed guy you bring out for four WR sets and either tell him to go long or run a jet sweep. The Packer reliance on him as a #2 now that Lazard is out is only proving right all those who questioned WR depth before the season began.

Good defenses will bottle up Adams, or at least contain him (like TB). Having no #2 threat at WR is how GB loses to the top brass in the NFC come playoff time.

+ REPLY
10 points
10
0
Leatherhead's picture

October 27, 2020 at 12:02 pm

I think your argument would be stronger if we were losing games because our our WRs. We aren’t. Your prediction about our ultimate failure in the playoffs is noted.

+ REPLY
1 points
4
3
Point-Packer's picture

October 27, 2020 at 01:07 pm

Rodgers forcing the ball to Adams against TB, of which resulted in two INTs (one for a TD), both seems like a symptom of Rodgers rightfully not having confidence beyond Adams and a game that was largely loss due to a lack of WR depth.

+ REPLY
3 points
4
1
Leatherhead's picture

October 27, 2020 at 02:12 pm

I think several things contributed to the interceptions. I think we lost mostly because we didn't protect our QB, who got hit, hurried, and sacked too often. In addition to Adams, and MVS, we had three other receivers on the field. Is everybody covered? And Adams double covered? So then why aren't the other receivers equally to blame? Why did HC call these plays?

I was born on a dairy farm, and I know the smell of Dairy Air. We didn't protect our QB well enough for him to do his job. If we had, this would have been a helluva lot closer. If that means running more or throwing to the backs more.....whatever it takes. I truly in my heart believe that if we can keep Rodgers up and healthy we're a 35 point offense ,even with UDFAs and Day 3 picks at the skill spots.

As regards this confidence thing.......if the coaches are confident enough to put him on the field that should be enough for Rodgers, and I think it is. He's certainly talked him up and thrown it to him. If Butterfingers drops it, that's on the coaches, not Rodgers. Do your job.

+ REPLY
4 points
5
1
Guam's picture

October 27, 2020 at 03:37 pm

I have to agree with LH on this one - the WRs did not lose the TB game, the O-line did. A better #2 would be useful, but Rodgers has to have time to throw for any WR to be successful.

+ REPLY
3 points
4
1
PearlyBakerBest's picture

October 28, 2020 at 08:24 am

I agree. But, I’m sure I’ll get ripped for this, the heat and humidity in Tampa was a driving force in the Packers poor play. When you step off that plane and you’re used to mild temps, the air gets sucked out of your lungs. You could see it, especially in the second half. Everyone was gassed. It was 90 degrees and 80% humidity at kickoff. Couple that with the mental aspect and momentum change it was almost impossible to overcome. I’ve lived in Tamp and the fact it was breezy means nothing down there. Also, Raymond James stadium holds heat like no other. Side note: I’ve been to games there with a packed stadium and I’d much prefer LH’s dairy air to the smell of 80k Sweating Tampanians? (Tampans?)(Tampanites?)

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Lare's picture

October 27, 2020 at 11:47 am

I see people writing posts that say the drops and lack of completions aren't the fault of MVS, it's because too many of the passes to him aren't very good- too far in front, in back, too high or too low. Instead, I say many of the passes are good and MVS simply isn't running the correct route. For example, look at the video above. If he squares the route off instead of coming 3-yards back for the ball it's a perfect pass and (probable) completion. And even then, a good WR makes that catch.

+ REPLY
2 points
4
2
NoNonsense's picture

October 27, 2020 at 12:11 pm

Again what route was he supposed to run there. He ran a curl or comeback route. Was he supposed to adjust his route based on the CB coverage? He ran the comeback route well, had plenty of separation at the top of the route but Rodgers threw the ball like he was expecting him to break or turn outside, not inside.

Until we know what his responsibility is there we dont know if was a bad route or route adjustment or a bad throw by Rodgers. Again its Rodgers so we have to assume MVS was in the wrong but was he really? It's not like Rodgers was perfectly accurate all day either.

Whatever it is they need to get it figured out or better teams will make them pay for those kinds of misses.

+ REPLY
2 points
3
1
Philarod's picture

October 27, 2020 at 12:35 pm

Even as is (was), that was an easy catch, and if they weren't exactly on the same page, my supposition is that (arguably) the best, most accurate thrower of a football in NFL history got it right.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
buddrow53's picture

October 27, 2020 at 04:56 pm

I thought a down and out would have been the right move, why he turned to his right with the pass being outside didnt make sense.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
HighPlainsDrifter's picture

October 28, 2020 at 04:37 am

Lare - You, like the other MVS haters, have no idea what route is correct. You have no clue whether any route run by any receiver is correct. This is because you have no idea what play is called and what routes are incorporated into each play.

You also need to re-watch the video. MVS turns to his right/the inside of the field. AR's throw is to his left/the sideline. Unless AR or MVS say what happened we will never know whether it was a miscommunication or one them made a mistake. You may think that you know, but you don't.

+ REPLY
-4 points
0
4
Archie's picture

October 27, 2020 at 11:53 am

1 - very effective play

2 - at first I agreed but upon further reflection I believe the problem is MVS' brain.

3 - Rodgers threw from poor platform

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
Razer's picture

October 27, 2020 at 12:19 pm

Not sure about these 3 plays - but - I do like this offense. It is sooo much better than the McCarthy take on the west coast offense. We are probably one serious receiver away from being Super Bowl sound

+ REPLY
2 points
3
1
Branden Burke's picture

October 27, 2020 at 01:46 pm

They really do need one serious receiver. I'm not one to trade draft capital. But they are close. They will be one of the last teams to pick. Go get a player. If lazzard and MVS are your #3 and #4 wr's, you are doing pretty darn well at the position. Right now with no lazzard and MVS at #2, it's pitiful. At this stage, the defense is ok. You can win in spite of the defense. It's not ideal, but it's been done in the past. But you have to button down the couple loose ends on offense and hope for good health.

+ REPLY
1 points
2
1
jannes bjornson's picture

October 27, 2020 at 02:45 pm

Gutedkunst should be on the phones 24/7 trying to swing a deal for a veteran WR who can make the key catches down to the road in the playoffs.

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
packer132's picture

October 27, 2020 at 02:57 pm

We just signed Seth Roberts who had some good games with Raiders and Panthers. He will start on practice squad and hopefully called up soon to provide depth. He has to be better than MVS and St. Brown

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
buddrow53's picture

October 27, 2020 at 05:00 pm

I like it also, never really know what the next play is going to be.

Watching the Rams thump the Bears I thought their offense looks alot like ours. Motion, crossing routes, quick passes, fun to watch.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
JohnnyLogan's picture

October 27, 2020 at 12:29 pm

This one particular play isn't the issue. MVS is fast, but he's also awkward. He seems on the verge of falling down on every cut. He's made some big plays but usually when the ball was dropped in his lap. He can be a #4 but we need more. Lazard I believe isn't a #2 either because of his lack of speed. Why in hell we let Foster get away is beyond me. The kid is fast and has good hands. Malik Taylor needs to be given a legit opportunity to see what he can do.

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
jannes bjornson's picture

October 27, 2020 at 02:50 pm

Let Taylor and Shepherd get their chances, keep the best players on the field has to be LeFleur's mantra. The D line can hold it's own and should stay at a six man unit in rotation. Martin and Barnes can take charge of the middle.

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
MarkinMadison's picture

October 27, 2020 at 12:44 pm

I think MVS read the coverage wrong.

I agree that Rodgers' footwork was off. I wonder if he saw Tonyan breaking open outside of his normal progression and just took a chance. Veggie Lasagna told me that even if he is hit in stride Tonyan doesn't make it inside of the 35.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
scullyitsme's picture

October 27, 2020 at 01:11 pm

We need a number two receiver, period. I’m sure the Lazard lovers will hate me for that. I hope I’m wrong. Oh to have Lazard as a number 3. I’m good with that. His ceiling is James Jones, love me some James Jones. He could fill in as a number 2, but wasn’t one. Probably not going to happen but I’d love to give up a 4-5th round pick for a quality #2 rental. The only thing that would be better is if there are any truth to the jj watt rumors, that would be priority number 1. I hear the salary cap fear mongers slapping the keyboard already. Right or wrong we spent all our draft picks on the future, it’s time to make a move for now to put us over the top.

+ REPLY
1 points
3
2
Branden Burke's picture

October 27, 2020 at 01:50 pm

We can spend a draft pick today for a proven receiver right now that won't hurt the cap. They just have to find the team interested, and I think there are a few teams that would be interested. Jj watt isn't realistic.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Guam's picture

October 27, 2020 at 03:25 pm

What would make you believe that Gute would do that deal now when there was the deepest WR draft in history last Spring and Gute took zero WRs?

+ REPLY
2 points
3
1
Jonathan Spader's picture

October 27, 2020 at 05:42 pm

The idea that a rookie by the time we drafted wouldn't put us over the top this year but bringing in a veteran now could. Rodgers returning to form has an impact as well. Supposedly Packers were interested in Zack Ertz for a trade.

+ REPLY
2 points
3
1
fordguy's picture

October 28, 2020 at 02:01 pm

Why on earth would they trade for a player who's out for 4-6 weeks with a injury?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Branden Burke's picture

October 28, 2020 at 12:04 am

.

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
Branden Burke's picture

October 27, 2020 at 09:53 pm

There are advantages to trading for the right WR. I'm not talking about wasting a pick on a rental. But finding a good, proven guy on a bad team making rookie salary and giving decent compensation for it has a lot of benefits.

It helps the team now. It fits them financially. Adams will soon be at the end of his contract facing his age 30 season. It helps prepare the team for that. I don't know about you, but I would much rather throw Adams money at a LT. Mostly because 34 year old LT's tend to still be playing at high levels and 34 yo wr's don't. You greatly lower the risk of using that same compensation on a player who just can't transition to this league. And it adds injury insurance at the wr position. The team is ready to win now. They spent a decade sitting on their hands with nothing to show but playoff appearances.

Again, I am not one to be a proponent of making trades. This is one of the few times where a sizeable trade makes a lot of sense. The guy they just signed doesn't move the needle. I get that they don't rely on wr's. That it's a balanced attack. But part of being a balanced attack involves using wr's. And the yards produced from that skill position not named Adams or lazzard is embarrassing. And the fact remains that although successful, the rams/san fran/green bay offensive coaching tree has yet to win a superbowl. All 3 have been shut down at one point or another offensively in big games. They are selling themselves short otherwise.

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
Leatherhead's picture

October 27, 2020 at 02:29 pm

Do you truly not understand that the whole idea is to run more and pass less , and to throw to RBs and TEs?

What ONE move would "put us over the top"? I mean, as I see it, we're a division winner if we keep Rodgers healthy so we're already formidable contenders. WHO would be the one WR that would guarantee it.? Julio Jones?

I don't think so. Really. And it doesn't bother me to lose a few games during the season, as long as we win at home and beat our division rivals on the road AND we keep our QB protected so we can use him in the playoffs.

+ REPLY
-1 points
5
6
ShooterMcGee's picture

October 27, 2020 at 01:19 pm

I noticed that Rodgers was throwing off his back foot more in this game than any other, a la 2019. Being somewhat off balance caused slight inaccuracies. Shouldn't MVS turn outside on an out? Instead he turns inside then goes out. That has to be a mistake and still he should have caught it. Sadly we have nobody better and the draft is 8 months away, not that the position will be addressed anyway. I won't make that assumption again. A long snapper in the 3rd won't shock me.

+ REPLY
-1 points
1
2
josefK's picture

October 27, 2020 at 02:06 pm

I hate to say it - but if not EQ who? You can't have a one-receiver offense - easily stopped. BTW don't take Minnesota lightly - they just about ripped apart Seattle's OL.

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
Leatherhead's picture

October 27, 2020 at 03:14 pm

We are 5-1, on our way to 6-1 with what we've got. Minnesota will be lucky to hold us to 40 next week.

And of course you can have a one WR offense. Line up two backs and two TEs with one WR. How about Adams, Jones, Williams, Tonyan and Lewis? If they're going to double Adams, we'll play 10 on 9 in the trenches where we'll out weigh them by about 30 pounds per man.

+ REPLY
-2 points
3
5
CheesyTex's picture

October 27, 2020 at 07:11 pm

"if not EQ who"...

IMO there are three better choices than MVS already on the roster for "slot" style passes where hands and quicks are way more important than flat out speed -- EQ (if he can shake off the rust), Taylor and Shepherd. No idea about the newly signed guy, but apparently he's an experienced slot receiver too.

It may still be too early to give up on MVS -- speed kills, and he's the only true burner on the roster to "take off the top". I guess it's just a matter of whether or not the light bulb goes on before patience runs out.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Branden Burke's picture

October 27, 2020 at 09:57 pm

I doubt they will ever give up on MVS. He is very cheap, knows the offense, has been available most every week, and has physical ability. But it's extremely unlikely he is on the roster after next season.

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
lucky953's picture

October 27, 2020 at 03:32 pm

Having played a lot of baseball, MVS lacks the fine motor eye-hand timing a receiver needs for catching a fast moving object. It's not something he will ever be able to do consistently. Hey Gutey, find a WR who has proven separation and catch ability. A trade for Randall Cobb makes sense. In this offense, he'd be a real asset.

+ REPLY
-1 points
2
3
PeteK's picture

October 27, 2020 at 04:39 pm

I agree, Cobb would be a very good fit at this point, but he signed a 3 year contract with 18 mill guaranteed. Too expensive for us .

+ REPLY
1 points
2
1
Since91's picture

October 27, 2020 at 04:04 pm

We cannot trade for too much salary people!!!
The NFL is in a crisis because of the virus. They are going to drop the salary down big time! We have multiple starters who are free agents next year. What would you rather have:???
Cobb now or Aaron Jones next year?
Watt now or Bahktiari next year?
Fuller now or Linsley next year?
This is not fantasy football or MLB
The Hard Cap runs this league and we are in trouble this offseason
Wake up people!

+ REPLY
5 points
5
0
nostradanus's picture

October 27, 2020 at 04:43 pm

Very true, for every guy they pick up that’s one less of their own they can sign. Reward your own and keep a happy locker room !

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
buddrow53's picture

October 27, 2020 at 05:12 pm

How about Michael Thomas for Bahk?

+ REPLY
-2 points
0
2
nostradanus's picture

October 27, 2020 at 04:40 pm

MVS is and always will be a one trick pony, the go route. But he is 50/50 at best even when the ball is on top of him. He’s gone next year.

+ REPLY
0 points
2
2
fansince1959's picture

October 27, 2020 at 05:17 pm

the MVS pass was virtually uncatchable, from what i can see

+ REPLY
-3 points
2
5
JohnnyLogan's picture

October 27, 2020 at 09:36 pm

Again, the issue isn't that one play, it's his overall play. He can't make quick cuts, can't catch well with just hands he's a body catcher, and even though he's fast he rarely gets good separation. Time to give someone else a chance.

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
Philarod's picture

October 28, 2020 at 09:42 am

Maybe, it was "virtually" uncatchable - as in, I can't catch it from my laptop.
But physically, it was quite catchable -- two hands on it, shoulder-high. I'd venture that 98% of starting receivers in the NFL make that catch at least 90% of the time.

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
canadapacker's picture

October 28, 2020 at 10:23 am

After watching the game again and reading all the above posts - AR was off a bit and I too would take him when off a bit than everybody else. Especially this year when he is not holding the ball that long. But I believe that Tonyon and Adams would have had more YAC if the ball was where it needed to be. From game to game things change and the play is different. Now without Jones and Bak - we get a pretty good performance out of the offense - except for that period of time late in the 3rd quarter, But if you are going to win a game or two - your D needs to step up when the O goes 3 and out. Finally everybody is talking about our lack of a 2nd receiver. I still believe that we have the talent. You cant judge MVS on 2 or 3 throws. The scheme in this game didnt utilize the tight ends a whole bunch on certain games they are terrific. But we had some nice plays to Tonyon and Sternies TD. We didnt use the jet sweep a whole bunch but with Ervin out MVS ran it for a first down. Jones runs that route and continues down the sidelines for big plays and that stretches the D. With him out it is harder for MVS to run his routes. MVS was a good decoy on one of Adams TD's I also think that Taylor is coming along - got his TD and Shepherd has filled in nicely both on the O and punt return. So I beg to differ - and as long as AR gets the ball out early and on target as he did in the first 3 games and uses the early open guys - we have the talent. Cant just pick at the drops or the routes - every team has those - even Adams - cant constantly have them and cant have them a big times - just think back to how many times Graham dropped those balls last year. Sorry for this rant ( and I scream at the TV sometimes ) but I have always liked the O receivers even last year.

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1

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.