Redskins: 16 Packers: 13

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly from Sunday's loss to the Redskins.

Clay Matthews, Mike Neal, Tramon Williams

The Bad

The Bad

Donald Driver, Aaron Rodgers, Mason Crosby

The Bad

The Bad

Mike McCarthy

BrokenTV

BrokenTV

 

PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHEESEHEAD NATION WEEKLY NEWSLETTER HERE.

__________________________

0 points
 

Comments (74)

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

October 10, 2010 at 10:47 pm

no love for bishop?

0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

October 10, 2010 at 10:48 pm

It was a toss up, for me anyway, between Bishop and Neal. Figured lineman never get the love. ;)

0 points
0
0
ShopeIV's picture

October 10, 2010 at 10:50 pm

why not just put up both?

0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

October 10, 2010 at 11:10 pm

I like the exercise of having to keep it to three.

0 points
0
0
alfredomartinez's picture

October 10, 2010 at 11:21 pm

TT style...

0 points
0
0
zub_a_dub's picture

October 10, 2010 at 10:54 pm

Bishop hands down had the best performance this year by a ILB for the Packers.

How many tackles did Hawk have where the player dragged Hawk for an additional 3 yards? If I didn't know any better I would have thought Hawk was getting his first start, not Bishop.

0 points
0
0
Idiot Fan's picture

October 10, 2010 at 11:04 pm

It didn't seem like the Redskins really went after Bishop in the passing game, which was surprising. Given that, I agree, Bishop looked good.

0 points
0
0
zub_a_dub's picture

October 10, 2010 at 10:57 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.

Brandon Jackson > Donald Driver, this Sunday. Next Sunday who knows? Play your hottest player.

0 points
0
0
dennis eckersley's picture

October 10, 2010 at 10:59 pm

amen

0 points
0
0
gratif's picture

October 11, 2010 at 04:07 am

to an extent maybe but when a guy has a much larger body of work to go off of you can't be too reactionary.

Most people would have pulled Ryan Grant after his 2 fumbles against Seattle in the playoff game. McCarthy stuck with him and got over 200 yards out of him.

If Tramon gets beat to you elevate Starks or Bush over him?

Speaking of Tramon holy crap is he going to get PAID.

0 points
0
0
GQ's picture

October 11, 2010 at 09:05 am

I agree, the running game was obviously working, why not just keep pounding. Instead Mccarthy decides to pass ( worse yet with 4 wideouts and no back ) the defense can tee off on Rodgers knowing it's a passing situation. Play calling and coaching - the dropped passes didn't help, but the play calling killed the Pack.

Defense looked good considering they were on the field all the time.

0 points
0
0
CSS's picture

October 11, 2010 at 09:37 am

"Bulaga, who's big weakness as a rookie is pass blocking."

What are you basing this on?

0 points
0
0
CSS's picture

October 11, 2010 at 08:27 pm

This about sums up Bulaga's game:

http://packersnews.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20101011/PKR07/10101...

I thought he was great. No idea how you can say, 'pass pro is his weakness.'

0 points
0
0
Idiot Fan's picture

October 10, 2010 at 11:01 pm

I was pissed after the game, but if you think about it, there are no dominant teams in the NFC. I don't expect the Bears to keep up their winning ways, and MN has a tough stretch coming up. This season is, by no means, over.

Oh, and love Rodgers, but he needs to be in the Ugly category today.

0 points
0
0
DAWG's picture

October 10, 2010 at 11:11 pm

THE GOOD- Lets hope Mathews - just cramps!
THE BAD- Drivers aging- Offensive- no cohesion w/ Rogers and offense-anywhere!LOST.
THE UGLY- MM-Don't go 4th and 1 w/ out a running game! 3 pts---u win!
WHY so many injuries?--Penalized how many? - UNBELIEVABLE

0 points
0
0
MarkinMadison's picture

October 11, 2010 at 09:52 am

Eh, they stopped the Redskins and got a decent punt return, and ended up with the three points on the next series anyway. Granted, with a much more difficult field goal, but it gave Crosby his shining moment. I don't think that the 4th and 1 decision broke the game at all. If you want to criticize MM, I'd go after the failure to call more running plays, and/or to get Rodgers to execute more running plays, depending on what you believe about MM's post-game comments.

0 points
0
0
NickGBP's picture

October 10, 2010 at 11:15 pm

Absolutely.

This Alex Smith being boo'd and then scoring a huge touchdown got me thinking.

What if Rodgers has been as good as he's been BECAUSE of Brett Favre? We all read the articles about how he holds on to things that people say/do things that he feels is a sleight. Maybe he just ran out of things to prove? He watched the Saints game last year and saw Favre blow it all away when it counted most. Someone reported that he was with his friends and was ecstatic, so we know he cared. The media doesn't do weekly comparisons between the two of them anymore. Everyone says he's great, the next elite QB, etc.

Im not saying that it got to his head but maybe he needs that chip on his shoulder to stand out? Hopefully he finds something new to feel sleighted about.

0 points
0
0
Jack's picture

October 11, 2010 at 02:23 am

That's an interesting take. Seems plausible.

0 points
0
0
PackerBelle's picture

October 11, 2010 at 07:46 am

Or maybe if his receivers could just catch the ball things would be fine. I was listening to the game on the radio since I was on the road and it seemed like most of his misses were balls that went off or through the hands of his receivers.

0 points
0
0
hyperRevue's picture

October 11, 2010 at 07:48 am

I'd say about 75% were balls that should have been routine catches (Driver responsible for at least 3 of those). The other 25% were a little off-target but probably should still have been caught.

0 points
0
0
Cole's picture

October 11, 2010 at 10:17 am

Most of Rodgers throws were fine. The receivers should go in the ugly more than A-Rod. If Jones catches a that 3rd down pass we likely would have gotten more points. Our biggest problem is not converting 3rd downs. No doubt about it that is the biggest difference between Rodgers last year and this year. In this game that was mostly the receivers fault for those horrible drops. I did think that Rodgers could have easily scrambled for a few firsts instead of risking the throws.

0 points
0
0
CSS's picture

October 11, 2010 at 10:20 am

Fair or unfair, turning the ball over in overtime (regardless of fault) usually lands you on Nagler's 'Bad' or 'ugly' list. The body of work usually goes out the door at that point. Circumstances be damned...

0 points
0
0
Cole's picture

October 11, 2010 at 10:41 am

CSS,

Yes I understand that, and that was a dangerous throw, but he did lead them down the field in overtime for a makeable fg. If Crosby had made it, would we still be talking about a bad game or would we talk about how he led them to the game winning fg?

Also, he could've taken the sack but wasn't it 3rd down? Can't remember.

The real question is why wasn't there a back in there for pass protection? I'm starting to not like the shotgun spread every single play. It's like if rodgers lines up under center you know it's a run. If he's in shot gun you know its a pass. Too predictable.

0 points
0
0
CSS's picture

October 11, 2010 at 10:47 am

Not disagreeing with you, Cole. Just pointing out what tends to land you on Nagler's 'Bad' or 'Ugly' list.

I would have landed him on the bad for a totally different reason: I don't know how well he's understanding the tempo of the game. Also, I sometimes feel like he attacks the game one series at a time without seeing the big picture (time of possession, lack of personnel through injuries, momentum, etc.) over a 60 minute game.

I have zero doubts about Rodgers ability to read defenses pre/post snap. I'm concerned that he hasn't ascended to a level yet where he can truly manage a game at the line of scrimmage. (Again, big picture and not series by series)

Personally, I want McCarthy to sink or swim now and pull back this entire offense. Script the opening series, manage tempo and clock control and get a rhythm.

0 points
0
0
zub_a_dub's picture

October 10, 2010 at 11:25 pm

Jackson should get a runners up award for the good, not his fault MM won't give him the ball when he is feeling it.

If you think about it there were many good individual performances by a number of players this game. IMO, even with the injuries, the Pack had the best athletic talent, MM got out coached plain a simple.

It took MM 8 games last year to tune into this team, maybe this year it takes him only 5 games, we can only hope.

0 points
0
0
Jacob's picture

October 11, 2010 at 12:21 am

All i have to day is that next year is ares

0 points
0
0
Jacob's picture

October 11, 2010 at 12:22 am

*Ours my bad

0 points
0
0
andrew's picture

October 11, 2010 at 08:42 pm

how can u say that.. this year was supposed to be ours.. last year we had a shot.. how long does it take before u see the team deliver consistently?

0 points
0
0
NoWayJose's picture

October 11, 2010 at 12:28 am

All I know is that this never would have happened if Greg Jennings was still alive.

0 points
0
0
NickGBP's picture

October 11, 2010 at 07:02 am

Yea. CSS, you still sure Mr Jennings is an elite receiver?

0 points
0
0
CSS's picture

October 11, 2010 at 09:09 am

Never argued he was, read what I wrote. I argued that catch at the time was anything but routine.

0 points
0
0
Cole's picture

October 11, 2010 at 10:18 am

We need to get Jennings involved on more slants and quick passes. Then send him on middle and deep routes.

0 points
0
0
andrew's picture

October 11, 2010 at 08:44 pm

jennings is a quick slant WR he likes it short across the middle of the field... his big plays come after the catch... they have him miscast as this randy moss.. he might catch one deep every hay nd nay.. but i have never really seen him as a deep route runner.. thats an opinion..
im sure someone could prove me rong.. but i definitly feel like rodgers doesnt even give jennings looks sometimes

0 points
0
0
fish's picture

October 11, 2010 at 12:37 pm

Jennings is useless! Unless you need someone to quickly jump in your face and tell you how great a play you just made he's the first one there, Always. He didn't even attempt to stop the defender that just burned him in that interception pass, he just smiles and watches him get up and run. Useless ass, even in double coverage, he does a little zig and zag, but again 0 Effort to get open.

0 points
0
0
Diggler's picture

October 12, 2010 at 06:06 pm

Take a lude Fish. Jennings is a stand-up guy and quality receiver. The problems with this offence run much deeper than any one player.

0 points
0
0
Nononsense's picture

October 11, 2010 at 12:47 am

Jackson should have made the good list, everybody has questioned his ability and he came through big time. I can't believe McCarthy didn't allow Jckson more carries especially in the first half.

0 points
0
0
bogmon's picture

October 11, 2010 at 02:06 am

Brandon Jackson needs to get a little nod for the game this week, but I think he owes a lot to the Bulaga Whale.

What a difference BB made in the line vs. Tauscher's frumpy ass.

Yes, I know Brian made some big mistakes, but the run blocking was so solid thanks to him.

GOOD: Packers now officially have a "strong" side....it just so happens to be wherever Brian Bulaga is playing.

0 points
0
0
Paul Carpenter's picture

October 11, 2010 at 05:27 am

Two terrible sights: Matthews with an ice bag on his hamstring and Finley on cruches.

Doesn't McCarthy see that Jackson is a good runner???

Driver dropping that many passes is a one-time fluke. Worry about other things on this team.

0 points
0
0
dgtalmn's picture

October 11, 2010 at 06:27 am

Unfortunately the Packers seem to be to predictable. As we were listening to the game (sorry I could not see only hear) I could predict us punting. Had some good drives and then stopped once the field shorten. You can point to the injuries which are becoming unbelievable, but there are some holes that were not address in preseason, and sticking with what you have sometimes just does not work. TT needs to learn how to work free agency.

0 points
0
0
davyjones's picture

October 11, 2010 at 07:56 am

Talk about free agency and what we should have done in the off season all you want, but the season is 5 weeks old and we have what we have--which is a damn solid and deep roster. It isn't TT's fault that however many starters are now down. We play with the players we have and GB (even minus some injured starters) had superior talent on the field yesterday. They should have won that game. This is on ridiculous play calling vs personnel decisions.

0 points
0
0
hyperRevue's picture

October 11, 2010 at 07:58 am

You can't just say that and walk away. What holes weren't addressed? And who in the free agency market would you have signed to fill them?

0 points
0
0
andrew's picture

October 11, 2010 at 08:47 pm

there really arent holes in the roster... there arent.. anywhere.. we have one of the deepest rosters in the nfl by a large margin if you ask me we can have 8 injuries and still be more talented than the other team..

anyone who says TT is making bad personnel decisions needs to be smacked.. peprah seemed like a stupid move.. yet peprah is holding his own... does every player work out? no.. but for the most part he si great at picking out talent

0 points
0
0
David's picture

October 11, 2010 at 08:32 am

I hereby nominate Chad Clifton for the bad or ugly category. A couple of sacks and one of them he got beat without even touching the guy.

At this point, he should be thanked for his career and given a seat on the bench. Performance-wise, its not up to the standards of the team and if the Packers are going anywhere, its the young guns at each tackle postion (Lang and Bulaga) that will have to get us there.

0 points
0
0
CSS's picture

October 11, 2010 at 09:35 am

Aaron or Brian,

Sorry to be a pest, but I'm repeating the question. MM, when questioned about the lack of running attempts at his press conference, said there were several run/options that Rodgers was opting out of the run and calling his own number. Any idea how often that happened on Sunday?

I'm not excusing McCarthy, it's still on him. That being said is there an issue with Rodgers calling his own number? Any way to tell if his pre-snap reads on those plays were accurate?

Thanks

0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

October 11, 2010 at 09:37 am

From what I could tell, and I'm sure Brian will get a better read on this when he does his film review, I only saw three legit throws out of called running plays. Now, as for the number of running calls that actually got changed to passing plays at the line of scrimmage, it's pretty much impossible to tell.

0 points
0
0
CSS's picture

October 11, 2010 at 09:41 am

Will be pretty telling if McCarthy assumes more play-calling responsibilities from Rodgers (i.e. no/minimal allowance on pre-snap reads.)

I truly have no idea if they're the right decisions, only the coaches film can tell that. Just wonder if it's messing with the teams rhythm.

You think we will see less autonomy for Rodgers (if it's even an issue)? Again, don't know, just asking.

0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

October 11, 2010 at 09:45 am

I think that's def a start. But McCarthy needs to use all of his playbook, formation wise, as well. Where the Falcon and Rhino? Where are the bunch formations? Where is the bootleg or the sprint option? It seems, again this is without counting formations from film but strictly guess work on my part, but it seems that the majority of the snaps are out or 3 and 4 wide spread formations. That's great if you execute along the way, but when you go three, four, five drives without scoring - you need to start adjusting.

0 points
0
0
CSS's picture

October 11, 2010 at 09:48 am

Agreed. My primary concern when I was seeing the formation repetition in-game was: "He's going to get Rodgers killed."

Cue Concussion....

0 points
0
0
NickGBP's picture

October 11, 2010 at 10:43 am

The problem is that this is exactly what Rodgers requested last week. 3 and 4 wide sets. Rodgers thought that was the fix. McCarthy listened to him and look how well it worked out. I'd trust McCarthy on playcalling more than I would Rodgers

0 points
0
0
hyperRevue's picture

October 11, 2010 at 10:59 am

Rodgers went to bat for his WRs and they let him down. I still think he was right.

0 points
0
0
MarkinMadison's picture

October 11, 2010 at 10:01 am

Maybe one thing to look at is the timeouts. Play clock was running down on the first two of the second half. Looking at the formations before and after the timeouts, there was at least one where they were in a run look prior to the TO, and came out of the TO in a definite pass route. I beleive they failed to convert on the play as well. Granted, it involves some guess work, but Bryan might look and see if Rodgers was trying to change the play(s) when the clock(s) was running down.

0 points
0
0
Andrew In Atlanta's picture

October 11, 2010 at 10:07 am

As bad as everything went, we left at least 9 points on the field (2 FGs missed and botched 4th down at goal line) and possibly 13 points if we get a touchdown on that 4th down. We did more than enough to win...and we didn't

It really bothers me that this team has a history of letting lesser teams hang around but sometimes you have to win ugly. That's what we did at the start of the 2007 season. We just can't lose that game up 10 in 4th quarter. Again, we left at least 9 points out there

I'm really happy for Bishop. I've been arguing to give him a real chance with extended play. Not happy that Barnett had to get hurt to get that chance but that's the NFL. He looked good yesterday and I hope he keeps it up. We'll see

0 points
0
0
Glorious80's's picture

October 11, 2010 at 01:41 pm

Mistakes at a critical time indicates an immature team.

0 points
0
0
CSS's picture

October 11, 2010 at 01:43 pm

Yet it's the veterans making the mistakes, the youth mistakes are few and far inbetween by comparison.

0 points
0
0
Glorious80s's picture

October 11, 2010 at 03:56 pm

Even worse. The veterans are supposed to be your leaders. Immagurity is not always a mattter of age.

0 points
0
0
Ron LC's picture

October 11, 2010 at 10:11 am

The "Cover Two" has MM and Arod confused, completely. A good running game would force the Safeties to play closer to the L-O-S.

0 points
0
0
CSS's picture

October 11, 2010 at 10:15 am

Chicago played a tighter cover-2 than Washington and he tore them apart. I won't dispute this is a passing team, but you need to mix it up so the defensive front four don't get pressure so easily. The passing game and running game are not mutually exclusive. An offensive linemans best friend against a DL pinning their ears back - run the ball directly at them or work the short passing game or screens.

Are screens even in the playbook any longer?

0 points
0
0
hyperRevue's picture

October 11, 2010 at 10:22 am

They pulled off one perfectly, but then Jackson ran into the blocked defender.

0 points
0
0
andrew's picture

October 11, 2010 at 08:50 pm

they run WR screens.. a lot.. its stupid..

0 points
0
0
Cole's picture

October 11, 2010 at 10:45 am

What's troubling is that every game this season it has been clear we have more talent than every other team we have played, yet we have still lost two games and came close to losing another.

It's like one game Capers loses for us, then McCarthey loses the next one. We haven't put it all together yet.

The players need to come together and play with more urgency too.

They play good early, then think that, because they have more talent they can play half-hearted the rest of the game and still win. Like this game we played very well in the first quarter and waltzed through the rest of the game and look what happened.

0 points
0
0
hyperRevue's picture

October 11, 2010 at 10:48 am

That's equally what's most troubling and what's most encouraging. They haven't even come close to putting together a complete game yet. But when (or 'if' is probably more accurate) they do, they're gonna be unstoppable.

I think through 5 games the one truth that has emerged is that the only team that can beat the Packers is the Packers.

0 points
0
0
Packnic's picture

October 11, 2010 at 11:06 am

absolutely. All i know is IF we ever do get everyone on the same page.. watch the hell out.

0 points
0
0
Glorious80's's picture

October 11, 2010 at 01:46 pm

Trent Dilfer was saying more or less that as the game gets tighter in the seocnd half the team likewise seems to to tense up, make critical mistakes. That's a sign of immaturity in my opinion. They don't know what it takes to win, yet.

0 points
0
0
lars's picture

October 11, 2010 at 11:01 am

Nagler nailed it. MM was brutal, just awful play calling. Running a goal-line QB sneak (and getting your QB cuncussed)was one of many F-up's by Mac.

Tramon Williams was the most exciting player on the field yesterday not named Orakpo or Mathews.

And, I have to admit Jackson finally ran the ball with some authority as Nagler said he would.

0 points
0
0
fish's picture

October 11, 2010 at 01:35 pm

I never understood using Rodgers in the QB Sneak. Yes it works on occasion, but that's your franchise Quarterback your smash mouthing out there. That's like saying, I bet I can drive my Lamborghini through that brick wall. Yes you can, but why?

0 points
0
0
andrew's picture

October 11, 2010 at 08:53 pm

gettin rodgers a concussion??... yeah.... DEFINITLY SOMETHING CAUSED BY PLAY CALLING..

not... if your going to take about how bad the play calling was.. at least use real reasons..

people run qb sneaks all the time..

0 points
0
0
NoWayJose's picture

October 11, 2010 at 12:08 pm

Is anyone else starting to think we drank the kool-aid a little too much on how much "talent" we have on the offensive side of the ball?

It seems like the main culprit here is the receiving corps, which simply does not live up to its reputation as elite. Jennings has dissapeared (say what you will about schemes slanted to him, truly great WRs never dissapear this long), Driver is not focused and Jones and Nelson simply aren't blowing anybody away.

Really, our elite offensive players are Rodgers, Finley, and Sitton. Overall, our line is average at best. Our running backs are below average. The WRs are still very good overall, but lacking game-changing talent.

All that said, I think our offense can be elite this year, but ONLY when Rodgers is firing at all cylinders. He can be that good and elevate everyone else. But, frankly, when he is not, our offense is not "talented" enough to scare anyone.

0 points
0
0
hyperRevue's picture

October 11, 2010 at 12:10 pm

It's not kool-aid. The offensive fire power was clearly evident last year. The talent is the same. It's just not clicking yet.

0 points
0
0
CSS's picture

October 11, 2010 at 12:28 pm

The Packers were 2nd in the league in drops last year behined only Kansas City. Should we start to trend in that direction again this year you can no longer call this core 'elite' on any level. Talented, extremely. Drive/game killers, more so.

Focus.

0 points
0
0
NoWayJose's picture

October 11, 2010 at 01:20 pm

Don't get me wrong, I still think the offense has the capacity to be high-powered and highly-effective like it was last year.

But, how often have you heard an announcer repeat the mantra that "James Jones and Jordy Nelson, these guys could be starting for most teams in the NFL." I think it's just one these things, we've all gotten used to saying, but I don't know how true it is.

0 points
0
0
Glorious80's's picture

October 11, 2010 at 01:49 pm

Curious all the drops. Was this a problem when BF was the QB? Seems he was known to scorch the fingers of his receivers.

0 points
0
0
andrew's picture

October 11, 2010 at 08:56 pm

you dont know how true it is for jordy or jones to start for most teams???

jones has been by and large our best WR so far this season... he could definitly start anywhere.. and nelson is a slot WR and would be a pretty good one if it wasnt for jones...

jennings does not look like he wants to be there.. really.. i dunno what it is.. wish i did.. but he really just seems liek he is done...

driver is an old ass man.. what do u expect.. as he gets older he is going to start to have mental lapses.. everyone should have known htis was coming
the fact that he still has as much spark as he does is amazing.

0 points
0
0
mark's picture

October 11, 2010 at 12:57 pm

Ok everyone. Take a deep breath. Our players, mostly our best ones, are dropping like flies. Our team is playing no where close to its potential. Our coach is making bad decisions and seems incapable of reacting or adjusting to what works (and what doesn't) in any given game. Despite all of this, we're 3-2. To most Packer fans, including myself, that "3-2" feels a lot like "0-5" ...but it isn't.

Folks, we're weathering the storm right now. And the good news is this: it's early. And even in spite of the key injuries and poor play, this is a deep team with a lot of physical talent. In the coming weeks, we may lose another game or two, but we may win a few as well. And barring a total meltdown, we'll emerge at the end of November as a team with a chance, maybe even a good one. But we will find out a lot about this team in the next 4-6 weeks. Do we retreat mentally? Do we continue with the penalties? Or do we finally learn to play 4 quarters of football with focus and intensity? Who on the field is going to lead this defense? Can #12 lead our offense? Can our coach lead this team?

The coming weeks are going to tell a lot about who the Green Bay Packers are. Everyone knows we're a young team, and usually young players aren't counted on as leaders. But this team has no choice, these young guys have to lead, they have to step up.

4 quarters of focus. 4 quarters of hustle. It needs to start next week. I still believe in this team.

We shall see.

0 points
0
0
fish's picture

October 11, 2010 at 01:00 pm

4 F'n Quarters. That's all we ask, 4 F'n Quarters for once!

0 points
0
0