The Lass Word: Why Doesn't Rodgers Trust the Other Receivers?

He's forcing the ball to Davante for a reason.

Among the many things that killed the Packers in the NFC championship game, was the failure to score touchdowns on two of their trips to the red zone.  All too often, this was caused by Aaron Rodgers trying to force the ball to Davante Adams, passing up other open receivers. 

 

On those two series, Green Bay ran six plays inside the ten yard line.  All were passes.  Five of the six passes were attempts to get the ball to Adams.  All five were incomplete (one was caught out of bounds).  In the week six meeting with Tampa Bay, Rodgers threw a pick six while trying to force the ball to Adams. 

 

As I watched this happen over and over again, I asked myself why?  Why does he do this?  Consistently.  Does he just not know any better?  That’s certainly not it.  Rodgers is one of the most cerebral quarterbacks in the game.  Is he obsessed with playing hero ball?   He’s too mature for that.  He’s way past playing for his own glory.  He just wants to win.  Does he just not see the field well enough?  Come on.  Nobody sees the whole field better than QB12.  He sees them all right.  Many times they cross right in front of his face.  Nope, he is making a conscious decision to decline them and go to his All Pro option, often in the face of double coverage 

 

What does he know that we don’t know?  What does he see that we don’t want to acknowledge? 

 

The answer could well be this simple.  Despite all of his talk about his admiration for the likes of Marquez Valdes-Scantling, Allen Lazard, Robert Tonyan, Equanimeous St. Brown et al, when the Packers are in a clutch situation, when they absolutely need a catch, Rodgers simply does not trust them.   At least not often enough. 

 

There must be a reason for this.  Rodgers works with them in practice every day.  He knows what they are, and are not, capable of.  Yes, he sees they have made several big play catches during the course of the season.  But he also sees the drops, the inability to consistently get open, forcing him to hold the ball.   

 

To be sure, Davante Adams drops the ball as well.  He dropped a big one last Sunday.  But Rodgers obviously feels better about his chances throwing to number 17 as opposed to the others. 

 

I love MVS, Lazard and Tonyan.  I love their effort, their willingness to block and do the dirty work, their aggressiveness after the catch.  They are the kind of players you want to pull for.  But it’s time we see them as Rodgers apparently does.  They are not number twos.  They are number threes.  MVS was a fifth round draft choice,  Lazard and Tonyan were undrafted.  There were reasons for that.  They are try- hard guys with a low ceiling that are probably not going to get much better.  They are what they are.  We've been hoping and expecting too much of them.

 

Further, what the Packers really need is not a number two receiver, they need a number one-A receiver.  They need a Travis Kelce to their Tyreek Hill.  They need a Chris Godwin to their Mike Evans.  They need a DK Metcalf to their Tyler Lockett.  They need a Cole Beasley to their Stefon Diggs.  They need a Calvin Ridley to their Julio Jones.  They need a Justin Jefferson to their Adam Thielen.   

 

And, of course, this brings us back to that tired old debate we all had after the draft last spring.  I don't really want to dredge that up again, but just sayin', guys like Tee Higgins and Chase Claypool  were still out there when Green Bay picked in the first round.  Either would have been a tangible upgrade over what we have.  Higgins had 67 catches for 908 yards and 6 touchdowns.  That’s with Joe Burrow, Ryan Finley and Brandon Allen throwing to him.  Claypool had 62 receptions for 873 yards and 9 scores.   What might their numbers have been with Aaron Rodgers throwing to them? 

 

The Packers flirted with Robby Anderson in free agency.  He wound up with 95 catches for 1,096 yards for Carolina. 

 

By comparison, MVS had 33 catches for 690 yards and 6 scores.  Lazard finished with 33 for 451 and 3.  Those are okay numbers, but the Packers need more.   Green Bay needs better balance between its top two pass catchers.  After Davante’s 115 receptions, the next highest total was Tonyan with 52.  Compare that with KC’s Hill (87) and Kelce (105), Tampa Bay’s Evans (70) and Godwin (65), Seattle’s Lockett (100) and Metcalf (83), Buffalo’s Diggs (127) and Beasley (82), or even Minnesota’s Jefferson (88) and Thielen (74). 

 

I’m not saying that Higgins or Claypool or Anderson would have single-handedly pushed the Packers past the Bucs and into the Super Bowl.  Certainly there are other needs.  But against the top teams, Aaron Rodgers needs another receiving option he feels comfortable with when he faces a critical situation.    Maybe Devin Funchess is the answer.  But he’s only had more than 44 catches in a year one time, and that was four seasons ago.   

 

Rodgers needs another 70 or 80 receptions guy.  Such a player is not currently on the roster.   And until he is, it seems inevitable we will continue to see passes thrown to number 17 whether he is open, or not.  As we saw again last Sunday, that usually does not end well. 

 

  

 

 

-----------------------------------

Ken Lass is a former Green Bay television sports anchor and 43 year media veteran, a lifelong Packers fan, and a shareholder.

NFL Categories: 
16 points

Comments (112)

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

January 28, 2021 at 03:40 pm

This argument presumes that Rodgers would trust a rookie as much as those other QBs trusted Claypool and Higgins. When has Rodgers ever trusted a rookie WR that much - even a high drafted one like Davante or Jordy Nelson? There is no history to support this argument.

The way I see it is Aaron did things different from Brady. When TB needed to make a play Brady mostly decided who to throw to based on who was being covered by King or Sullivan. On our side Aaron focused on throwing the ball to Davante no matter who was covering him even though the Bucs had some issues with their DBs. Both have their advantage and disadvantages, but I think it is safe to say that the Brady strategy of attacking the weaker DBs was the better option.

18 points
19
1
dobber's picture

January 28, 2021 at 05:45 pm

"Both have their advantage and disadvantages, but I think it is safe to say that the Brady strategy of attacking the weaker DBs was the better option."

I think the response would be that TB's receivers beyond Mike Evans--Chris Godwin and Gronk, and maybe even Miller--are better than Lazard and/or MVS....and that none of TBs CBs are on par with Jaire Alexander.

1 points
4
3
Coldworld's picture

January 28, 2021 at 06:27 pm

I think, at least on the day, Godwin and MVS were excellent. Gronkowski had one significant catch on a screen, the other TE was the more significant. I don’t think it’s disparity in WRs, I do agree that there isn’t the disparity in CBs. Overall though, Bowles didn’t give Rodgers an opportunity like Pettine did. Brady did far less than Rodgers once he was under pressure in the second half. In the first he had way more time than Rodgers did. That is a factor too.

4 points
4
0
Crankbait's picture

January 29, 2021 at 06:54 am

If a professional football receiver is wide open you throw the damn ball to him.

3 points
3
0
Packers1985's picture

January 29, 2021 at 12:04 pm

And the professional football receiver is supposed to make the catch... No wonder we are second in the dropped passes this year.

2 points
2
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

January 29, 2021 at 07:44 am

TB's #2 and #3 CBs are better than GB's by quite a bit. People defended King all year, suggesting he was actually good when healthy, but in fact he probably is a low end #2, by which I mean of all the #2 CBs (the other starter), he was close to the worst starter). King allowed a 90 passer rating, so he isn't god awful, but that isn't anything like good either.

Sullivan played 350 snaps in 2019 and played well, while Tramon played 761. That suggests Sullivan, who played well in 2019 (34 passer rating allowed) was not used in all situations. In 2020, Sullivan had to be the starter, and he played 729 snaps. Full usage revealed weaknesses such that Sullivan allowed a 96.0 passer rating.

So of course Brady threw at Sullivan and King. There is likely to be a mismatch that the offense doesn't even have to scheme to obtain. The wonder of it is that Brady ever threw a pass anywhere near Jaire.

I agree that Lazard and MVS are both #3 WRs. Lazard averaged 4.6 targets per game (3.3 recs/gm) in 2020 and just 3.2 targets/game (2.2 recs/gm) in 2019. MVS averaged 3.9 and 3.5 targets per game, but just 2.1 and 1.6 RECs/game. Those just aren't number two wide receiver numbers. Cobb for example averaged 7 or 8 targets per game. Starting in 2017 Cobb slipped to 5.1 targets (4.4 RECs/gm), but that's because Davante was supplanting him, with Adams getting 8.36 targets per game (5.3 RECs). The targets are important because it forces secondaries to cover multiple receivers, but getting 5.5 recs out of Lazard/MVS versus 9.7 recs/game out of Adams/Cobb is worlds of difference as well.

GB needed/could have really used a legitimate a #2 WR. It may be that there just weren't enough draft picks or money to get a legit #2... oh wait, there was a draft pick that did squat and every one knew he was going to do squat.

As for 1 and 1A wrs, GB had Jennings and Driver, then Nelson and Jennings, then Nelson and Cobb. [Here come the downvotes! - Tonyan is a nice player who catches everything and blocks just okay, but he gets his recs on scheme or finding a hole in the zone and sitting down properly in that soft spot. He isn't a mismatch and has been overrated on most forums. Nice player, better than Graham, but he isn't a Kittle or a Kelce. He isn't a #2 option either.]

5 points
5
0
Coldworld's picture

January 29, 2021 at 08:33 am

I defended King, but perhaps due to mounting injuries, he has got slower and slower and less agile. He was clearly a problem in that game. Looked nothing like he did in 2019. Yet we won’t play Jackson or Hollman. That speaks volumes as to their merits or to the decisions of the coaches. I tip my hat to players who play through injuries where needed, but it’s up to coaches to determine if that is a good idea. Based on what I saw, I question their decision.

I

2 points
2
0
jannes bjornson's picture

January 29, 2021 at 01:17 pm

That's the rub with King's declining performance and the absolute whiff on a Two pick going to Jackson.
A void in the depth dept. Sullivan is at best a dime guy. Do not believe Redmond will be retained. Poor drafting.

1 points
1
0
Coldworld's picture

January 29, 2021 at 01:37 pm

Redmond is a safety. He’s actually a decent third deep safety and ST option as well as cheap. If he doesn’t return, it’s likely our UDFA rookie cb on the PS. I think he is more of a safety type.

Sullivan was better the year before, but lacks the speed to play outside. I know they like Ento, but he’s unknown and has been injury prone. Hollman seemed to have potential but seems to have joined Jones as unplayable.

1 points
1
0
jannes bjornson's picture

January 30, 2021 at 09:43 am

They will bring in three more CBs this off-season. If Hollman could figure out the game he would have been on the field. Re-boot.

1 points
1
0
fastmoving's picture

January 28, 2021 at 03:43 pm

This was always his biggest weakness, besides to hold the ball forever. He could even bestter than he already is, if he had used everyone. Sometimes he did, an it looked kind of unstopable. But in big, close game and in the playoffs he forces the ball to his favorit more often than not.
Guess its to late to change it, but I often wonder how much better, maybe the best QB ever, could have been.

5 points
10
5
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

January 29, 2021 at 06:13 am

I think he is a very good QB!

It wasnt until Sharpe was hurt forcing Favre to start spreading the ball around to other WR's before we saw Favre improve significantly as a QB. There is a reason why the Packers and Rodgers have so much success whenever Adam's is out.

I agree with the premise Lass is making about having another talented #1 type WR to pair with Adam's. You only have so much draft capital each year and seeing how our OL cannot stop/dominate playoff caliber DL's, or how our DL cannot stop the run, or apply consistent inside pass pressure (other than # 97) where are you going #1, and #2?

3 points
4
1
Crankbait's picture

January 29, 2021 at 06:56 am

Exactly, the Packers offense has played much more efficiently without Adams in the lineup.

1 points
2
1
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

January 29, 2021 at 08:04 am

I agree. As for Favre, opposite Sterling Sharpe he had Perry Kemp in 90 and '91, Sanjay Beech in '92, Mark Clayton in '93 ( 330 yards) and finally Brooks in '94 (though he still only had 648 yards).

The wonder is that Sharpe didn't get 225 targets per year.

1 points
1
0
jannes bjornson's picture

January 29, 2021 at 01:19 pm

Wolf was building up the defense.

1 points
1
0
scullyitsme's picture

January 28, 2021 at 04:15 pm

Careful, this is a touchy subject, don’t let Nagler and others at cheesehead tv know we need another good receiver. They take it personally. Nagler even took a dig at us today on his packers daily. You did the unthinkable and called Lazard and mvs #3s( which I agree with, maybe as far as interchangeable 3-4). Sure to be blow back.

8 points
12
4
baldski's picture

January 29, 2021 at 12:35 am

scully, I agree. Going all the way back to Ron Wolfe. He said his greatest regret was not getting another #1 receiver for Brett Favre.

2 points
3
1
tommynak's picture

January 28, 2021 at 03:55 pm

I am as big a fan of 12 as there is but this premise of this article is a cop out. To throw into double teams when you perceive there to be open receivers is ridiculous to think AR does this. Our other WR & TE have proven to be very capable outside of Adams. 12 missed Lazard on a wide open TD when he threw to Tae out of the end zone and all it took was a softball right in front of him. To suggest Tonyan is one of our guys with drops makes no sense at all his catch % was off the charts and he catches everything thrown his way and the guy has not come close to his ceiling as you suggested. MVS talent is bubbling out of him and it was on full display in NFC title game, the guys runs like wind. He cures the the occasional drop and he will be as much as any #2 WR you put on that list which I might say was a pretty weak list. Is Lazard a #3, probably but a great team guy that has proven to be more than capable and does the little dirty things as well. Find a new narrative and don't beat last years offseason one to death. We didn't lose the NFC title game because of our receivers outside of Adams. The Pack just didn't play a complete game and wasn't as clean as they needed to be and #12 was as much a part of that as anybody else, O except for Kevin King if you want to lame blame on 1 player. He was horrendous and has played his last game in GB I would imagine.

18 points
19
1
dobber's picture

January 28, 2021 at 05:47 pm

"MVS talent is bubbling out of him and it was on full display in NFC title game, the guys runs like wind. He cures the the occasional drop and he will be as much as any #2 WR you put on that list"

But ARod needs to throw to MVS in 2020-1, not 2021-2.

-1 points
1
2
PeteK's picture

January 28, 2021 at 06:02 pm

No one in the NFL had a better avg than MVS, 20.9. AJ also had 46 catches and Williams 31. If we look at all the weapons , no one was better.

3 points
3
0
dobber's picture

January 29, 2021 at 07:18 am

Weren't we, just a couple weeks ago, bemoaning MVS's drop rate and speculating ad nauseum about reasons why he didn't seem to be able to catch passes below chest level?

2 points
2
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

January 29, 2021 at 08:35 am

MVS is the quintessential #3 deep threat wide receiver. He can stretch a defense vertically. But he isn't a polished receiver, and isn't good short or in the intermediate areas of the field. [Caveat /admission: I got excited these last few games because MVS did make some plays on short passes that he caught short of the first down and still got the 1st down.]

MVS isn't a high volume receiver: see his measly 3.3 targets per game. He isn't a move the chains guy. MVS had 27 receptions for first downs (793 snaps). Davante had 73 in 774 snaps.

You know, Green Bay has the greatest pure passer since Marino with a pretty good OL. It isn't surprising that mediocre talents get some marginally above mediocre results.

7 points
7
0
dobber's picture

January 29, 2021 at 08:47 am

I'll point to Billy Schroeder who had essentially 2 -- 1000 yard seasons in GB after taking 5 years to develop (remember that he came out of UW-Lax). Quintessential project who could run, but was never a good route runner and would never be someone who you would say had 'good' hands. Had a career average of 15.1 ypc.

When he left GB and went to Detroit, he never caught more than 600 yds in a season. Brett Favre much? (In all fairness, I think he started having leg issues at that point, but he didn't miss games) Let's not lose the point that MVS might be what he is because he has ARod chucking to him. I think, under the circumstances, that MVS should be at least Billy Schroeder.

1 points
1
0
Coldworld's picture

January 29, 2021 at 01:42 pm

Seems like your analysis is stuck in September. Part of the volume issue is the amount of coverage he draws. When ignored he has increasingly produced numerically and from more diverse routes. If that continues, then he is more than he was and that you describe.

1 points
1
0
Handsback's picture

January 28, 2021 at 04:03 pm

The only problem I have with Rodgers not liking his other receivers is when Adams is out, they step-up and win games. If they can do when Adams is out, they can do it when Adams is covered.
I don't think it's trust as much as its familiarity. A QB like Boyle, (not saying he's better than Rodgers) would try to look at all the options and would see that Lazard was open and Adams wasn't and would have thrown a TD to him instead of an out of bounds catch.
Improve the WR group and maybe we will see a better distribution, but not right away. I think, don't know for sure, that MLF's offense wants to use the TE and RBs as the #2 receiver. I suspect Next year will be the highwater mark for Rodgers and this offense.

13 points
13
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

January 29, 2021 at 09:03 am

Davante missed 2 games: NO and Atlanta. Against NO, Lazard stepped up with 146 receiving yards. The other WRs had a grand total of 5 yards (MVS). The team got 50, 36 and 18 from Tonyan, Jace and Lewis, and 2 TDs. The RBs added 20.

Against a bad Atlanta team, GB got 135 receiving yards and a receiving TD out of their RBs (plus 81 rushing yards) and 98 yards and 2 TDs from Tonyan. MVS, Shepherd and Taylor combined for 7 recs on 12 passes for 86 yards, 0 TD. The other WRs weren't bad against a bad team, but the TEs and the RBs stepped up.

The Packers did win without Davante, that is true.

1 points
1
0
jannes bjornson's picture

January 29, 2021 at 01:25 pm

Maybe LaFleur game-planned them into the scheme. That's another version of the story.

2 points
2
0
TarynsEyes's picture

January 28, 2021 at 04:13 pm

Greg Cosell nailed it today on Cowherd show. Forcing the ball to Adams was done all season and was applauded and boasted because it worked, Now, everyone wants to know why he did against the Bucs and are upset that he does when it failed, at least to expectations set by the regular season.

I and a few have talked and complained that this is not sustainable against the better defenses and come playoff time. Though for me, I complained of other aspects which were more defense based and any failure by the offense would hinder and or expose those aspects. This game however, showed GB to be the inferior team in situational football which proves my issues on both sides of the ball. I had hoped for an SB win but accepted it likely to not become a reality.

Having and needing trust is not deniable for success, but the amount of emphasis placed upon can be detrimental as it creates too great a closing out of others.

8 points
11
3
Swisch's picture

January 28, 2021 at 06:54 pm

Thumbs up from me, Taryn, and a good evening to you.
It seems fair to ask, though, in assessing your objectivity in general regarding Aaron Rodgers: Why are you no longer Tarynfor12?

1 points
1
0
TarynsEyes's picture

January 28, 2021 at 07:06 pm

Good evening to you.

My only reason was to have a name more in tune with the avatar, and how I see the games, players etc. Though I'm sure some will invent other reasons and to them, I say...nothing.

4 points
4
0
Swisch's picture

January 28, 2021 at 07:17 pm

My basic question -- sincere, and also meant to be in good fun for everyone -- was as to whether you had changed in the way you looked at Rodgers.
I agree that that there's no need to guess beyond that in a way that is prying or in any way non-positive.
Thanks for the answer.

1 points
1
0
TarynsEyes's picture

January 28, 2021 at 08:27 pm

His passive-aggressive approach with the media wears thin. Creating unnecessary drama as though he can create a chaos, and smirk at fans and media for making something of it.

What he said after the loss was totally unnecessary, and he knew it, and then doing it again with his passive-aggressive redirection explanation.

Many will applaud this about him, but I find it petty and a dis toward the fans of the Packers more than the media people he abhors.

It screams of 08 Favre having no respect for the fans with the retiring not retiring. Not the same level but the same pattern nonetheless.

4 points
4
0
croatpackfan's picture

January 29, 2021 at 04:45 am

This is the best comment from you I ever put my eyes on. I completely agree with you.

I will repeat myself. Father time did not affect Aarons arm strength, but it looks like time affect a little of precision and his vision of the field. He maybe slow a little in his progressions and that is why he forcing the ball to the 1st target.

If he will admit what is happening, I'm certain he will be able to avoid those little, but significant, mistakes and play at least another if not another 2 MVP seasons.

Also, I believe that when we come down to the preparation, Packers should ask help from specialist who will help Aaron to overcome his overconfidence in himself and/or lack of confidence in others. To me it looks like when Packers are favorites he very often play under his level, contrary to that, when Packers are consider as underdog, he execute on the highest level. That brings me to the conclusion when Aaron wants something very badly, he will block and his performance will not be on expected level. This is not on physicality, it is on mental part of his person.

Regarding his comments after the game, I agree with you and somehow I feel that the main reason Packers lost this season NFCCG are Aaron Rodgers, MLF, Hackett / Pettine. I think their game plan was not that good as we are used to.

0 points
1
1
Leatherhead's picture

January 28, 2021 at 04:54 pm

Why does the answer always seem to be “we need a WR.”? 346 yards, 3 TDS, 48 attempts, 5 sacks, multiple hits and the answer is to add a guy to play ahead of MSV and Lazard?

We were the BEST passing offense in the league!! TDS, ints, passer rating, yards/attempt.......

But we need passing solutions........

How about protection solutions? Or running the ball solutions? Nope. We’ve got to add a superduper receiver.

16 points
19
3
Coldworld's picture

January 28, 2021 at 06:33 pm

Because it’s a simple explanation to latch on to in part. It also offers an easy solution; name a receiver who did well or whom one likes coming out this year. The downside is it requires pretty much ignoring MVS’ excellent performance in this game as well as your point. More significantly it prevents people looking for the real reasons why we were less prepared and out thought.

-2 points
1
3
Nate-1980's picture

February 16, 2021 at 11:00 am

Well the bucs had better weapons at receiver then the pack before they went out and got ab, then won the super bowl, so there’s that..

0 points
0
0
PhantomII's picture

January 28, 2021 at 09:42 pm

ML offense uses a couple WR's a couple TE's and RB in it with play action. When the running game is not humming everything kinda falls apart. The OL were not getting much movement on run plays. Adams is quick and MVS is fast. Lazard and Tonyan are not very fast making them easier to cover with less separation. ML's basic premise is using same personnel with ball going to different player on a given snap. It makes it harder to abandon ML's offense to a degree and get the right personnel (faster) involved and fit in his offense. It is the biggest problem with ML's offense. It works until it doesn't and then in order to get pieces to get separation it's no longer his offense. I don't like how SF and Tampa play us. They are very bunched up w/ their fast ILB's. I think the best offense against it would be 4 WR's wide and open up the middle and use the RB some with it. I think ML's offense must evolve into a version of this to beat this style defense even if for these type of games. A 1A WR or #2 would take dbbl coverage off Adams.

4 points
4
0
enemy's picture

January 29, 2021 at 10:21 am

Couldn't agree more on this. Lack of balanced attack in clutch situations was atrocious. In those two red zone drives that ended with field goals, the impact role could've been Dillon with just one run attempt. They panicked, lose their cool... MLF had to stop that.
It's not the QB - WR issue, it's the game plan and sticking with it.

4 points
4
0
Philarod's picture

January 28, 2021 at 04:25 pm

For the last 10 years, Rodgers has had to play almost perfect football for the Packers to win, especially in the playoffs. Almost impossibly, he has done this game after game -- perhaps 10 of his 13 seasons - to give the Pack illusions of being contenders.

In the whole game, there may have been a couple plays where he tried to force into Davante, and one where, perhaps, he could have scrambled into the EZ or down to the 2 or 3.

Rodgers - with even average play from his targets (and perhaps, better officiating on the pick intended for Lazard) would have thrown for at least 4 TDs and 0 picks and of course, a 2-point conversion. This is with the Oline having a bad game and his best two weapons - AJ and Davante - playing poorly.

Look at every postseason game (20) of his career. When did they win when he didn't play great? Once - versus the Bears. How many times did he play terrific yet could not lift what in essence was a 7-9 type team. It's happened at least 5 times.

He sometimes does force the ball to Davante, and Sunday, Davante never made a special play for him. It's a bit frustrating. And yet, we praise our secondary receivers as if they're prime Larry Fitzgerald if they manage to both get any separation and hold onto the ball.

Perhaps, Higgins or Claypool would have needed more time to gain AR's trust, but look what they did with QBs not close to Rodgers's level - or look what Jefferson did with Cousins.

2 points
5
3
Coldworld's picture

January 28, 2021 at 05:55 pm

If a Jefferson had fallen further we might have him not Love per rumor. Likely he just means MVS wouldn’t have developed to be our best receiver in terms of stats in the last game as a result though.

2 points
2
0
Philarod's picture

January 28, 2021 at 05:53 pm

MVS played a very good game, but I'll take Jefferson's average game over that (,if not purely statistically).

2 points
3
1
Coldworld's picture

January 28, 2021 at 05:58 pm

I’m not arguing that Jefferson might not have had a better game, but that the likely opportunity cost would mean it had to be a monster to make a difference. The fact is, Jefferson would have cost an arm and a leg in picks anyway, and he was the standout. So taking a somewhat unrealistic example to start with.

2 points
2
0
Packers1985's picture

January 29, 2021 at 12:20 pm

Why you are only knitpicking the last game how about the other games where his catch percentage is the low 50's. The best receiver is the one who does it consistently not one or two games.

4 points
4
0
Coldworld's picture

January 29, 2021 at 01:49 pm

Because we were talking about the last game and my pony was that if the best receiver in this class were available we would have to subtract 108 yards and no drops before we saw a difference. Actually far from a given that Jefferson could significantly have exceeded that and thus not likely drafting him would have altered that outcome.

Read before you quibble perhaps

0 points
0
0
Nate-1980's picture

February 16, 2021 at 11:07 am

Phil wish I could give this more thumbs up, Rodgers has to carry this team on his back, and people still think we shouldn’t make it easier on him with better skill players, it makes zero sense..

0 points
0
0
mbpacker's picture

January 28, 2021 at 04:27 pm

The question is not if we need another receiver or two but what type. We seem to have tall, more physical receivers. I think we need a smaller, faster, shifty slot-type player. One that can make others miss and is a threat to go the distance. Outside of MVS strait-line speed, we really don't have any dangerous burners on this team. Any healthy ones that is. Cobb was like this early in his career. We need to infuse some danger and speed into the receiving corps. Our big receivers are like 3rd options and do a good job of down field blocking, but we have so many of them.

8 points
9
1
Coldworld's picture

January 28, 2021 at 06:01 pm

Ervin didn’t really stay healthy enough to know, but he at least seemed to be seen as filling part of that role early on.

0 points
1
1
dobber's picture

January 29, 2021 at 08:50 am

Someone else mentioned that once Ervin got hurt, the sweep action went away. Austin filled that role a little after being signed, but fell off the map in the playoffs.

A friend who is a coach explained to me that sweep action is very timing and practice intensive. It takes a lot of reps to get that down...that's why they couldn't just pop MVS into that role. Hopefully with a full camp coming and OTAs/minicamps, they'll get options to keep that in the playbook when guys get hurt.

1 points
1
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

January 29, 2021 at 09:26 am

I think that makes perfect sense as to why GB couldn't just pop Austin into the jet sweep role. Ervin himself only got 1 rushing attempt in 4 games for the 2019 season.

MVS has been here 3 seasons. If the team can't make it work with MVS in 3 years (2 if you only count LaFleur years, which might well be very reasonable), when might MVS become available for that role? The answer sounds like maybe never.

0 points
0
0
jannes bjornson's picture

January 28, 2021 at 08:43 pm

A slot Wr who can create in the Return Game, Si.

0 points
0
0
Leatherhead's picture

January 29, 2021 at 08:53 am

Don’t return punts or kicks.

0 points
0
0
jannes bjornson's picture

January 29, 2021 at 01:23 pm

Tell that to Andy Reid.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

January 29, 2021 at 03:41 pm

I re-gift most of them.

1 points
1
0
jannes bjornson's picture

January 30, 2021 at 09:47 am

That was funny.

1 points
1
0
Since'61's picture

January 30, 2021 at 09:59 am

COOKIE! Brilliant Dobber. Thanks, Since ‘61

1 points
1
0
4zone's picture

January 28, 2021 at 04:45 pm

With the expected radical drop of the salary cap, and a boat load of our own FAs looking for the career contract, signing anyone this off season may be a pipe dream. Other than maybe a few teams well ender the cap, this may be the worst year for free agent signings ever for the entire NFL.

Don't get your hopes up for a splash signing. Expect more like a mass exodus.

3 points
4
1
Coldworld's picture

January 28, 2021 at 06:20 pm

There are some teams well below cap

Overthecap.com lists the following;

Estimated Cap Space
($175M Cap Limit) Estimated Cap Space
($190M Cap Limit)
Colts $86,201,931 $101,201,931
Patriots $65,208,537 $80,208,537
Jaguars $59,128,585 $74,128,585
Jets $56,601,575 $71,601,575
Washington $49,559,205 $64,559,205

Now, this may be a little off, but there are teams that can suck up the cream. We could see some teams in the AFC get a lot better in theory.

At the lower amount the Packers have effectively zero room as listed. But they are better off than slightly over half of the teams. I have heard 185. Item as likely, that would still leave 6 or 7 teams negative. I think this ignores about 5 million for draft signings and restricted FAs.

I think we will see the cream move fast for big money and then it could get very interesting, with players taking less, incentive laden and back-ended deals to keep playing and fit under the cap. I would expect restructuring too. Overall, I think the Packers have a good pipeline set up in most positions of loss, but we will see.

I’m sure TGR will have a deeper perspective to share as this develops, but I think that, in addition to Jones and Linsley, we will lose Preston Smith for cap reasons. Before people celebrate, he was one of our best players late in the season. We don’t have much more than development prospects to fill that gap. That’s going to impact our draft heavily. I suspect low cost free agents later.

I think we have starters (Gary, Runyon etc.) for most positions other than CB and DL, it’s what comes behind that may be more speculative and we may see some cheaper prove it signings to bolster the draft. There are going to be a lot of second and third tier vets looking to stay in the game I think. I believe we will be more likely to try to keep our RFAs, probably a difficult market for most, which may mean no tenders (other than Tonyan, whom I’d try to lock up long term anyway). We may be more likely to see players like M Adams retained at low cost. We could also see a few Lewis type aging vets on the market late. I think there will be a lot of churn later in the off season.

3 points
4
1
Guam's picture

January 29, 2021 at 07:49 am

Great post and information CW! I have heard several different cap numbers for the Packers recently and yours is the most favorable. You indicated the Packers were about at zero deficit if the cap is set at $175million. Other posts indicated as much as a $25 million deficit if the cap were $175 million. Any idea where the differences are coming from?

1 points
1
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

January 29, 2021 at 09:49 am

Thumbs up from me.

Judging relative cap space for all 32 teams is difficult. For example, Indy has a lot of space but no QB. True, even after plugging in a large number for a QB, Indy still has well over $30M.

On first glance, GB looks tied for 27th worst. Again, if one took a deep dive probably most teams aren't losing two elite starters (albeit at positions that don't cost a ton like OLB, CB, WR), a starting CB, or have a bunch of useful RFAs to pay.

$185M would help a lot. I thought I would give people time to decompress before taking a deep dive into an article filled with numbers. The Packers likely have a good idea how revenue went this year and how much borrowing from future years is necessary just to reach $175M.

1 points
1
0
buddrow53's picture

January 28, 2021 at 04:47 pm

You should have looked at targets while doing your article. Claypool and Higgins targets were 109 and 108 MVS AJ and Big Bob 65-64-59 We dont need #2s we need more targets it builds confidence.

Not a good comparison.

Still enjoyed the team the effort the fun the joy that AR showed his teammates success.

Everybody else should too!!!

7 points
8
1
buddrow53's picture

January 28, 2021 at 07:46 pm

per nfl next gen stats

comps targets %

Adams 115 148 77.8

Lazard 33 46 71.7

Big Bob 52 59 88.1

MVS 33 63 52.3

So the other 3 118- 158 74.6

The other 3 will only get better in my mind!

0 points
1
1
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

January 29, 2021 at 10:25 am

I looked at targets for MVS and Lazard and reached the opposite conclusion!

Claypool had 7.25 targets per game. Higgins had 6.75 target/game. MVS had 3.9 and Lazard had 3.54. Combined MVS and Lazard = one Claypool or one Higgins, give or take. That makes those latter two players #2s and MVS and Lazard #3 wide receivers.

As for TEs and RBs: Claypool plays for the Steelers. Ebron for Pittsburgh had 91 targets and McDonald added 20 more. Higgins plays for Cleveland, whose TEs had 138 targets vs. 91 targets for Packers' TEs. That's far more TE targets than GB had. Browns RBs had 69 targets and the Steelers had 80 RB targets vs. 100 for GB, 115 if Tyler Ervin is deemed an RB, so the Packers did gain some ground there.

Can these two GB receivers play better? IDK. Maybe, but I suspect Lazard is at his ceiling, but he might stay healthy for 16 games, which would help. MVS has room, though.

1 points
1
0
gkarl's picture

January 28, 2021 at 04:50 pm

We know the 5 passes to DA were incomplete and forced into coverage. I have to believe 4 of the 5 attempts would have been caught if throw to open receivers. You can't catch what is never thrown. It looked like there were better and higher percentage options available. Ken if as you say AR was "passing up other open receivers" would it really make any difference who they were. You seem it think so I disagree.

3 points
3
0
Lare's picture

January 28, 2021 at 05:03 pm

You only need good WR options if you're trying to win a SB. That does not apply to teams that are content with winning the NFC North every year.

-2 points
5
7
dobber's picture

January 29, 2021 at 08:52 am

Elite teams stockpile talent.

0 points
0
0
Coldworld's picture

January 28, 2021 at 05:24 pm

Let’s take the example of Tonyan. This season he has a fantastic catch rate. If he hasn’t earned trust yet then the question of whether the threshold is ridiculous is posed.

Rodgers was the same with Jenkins, then Nelson. I think it’s natural but perhaps taken a tad too far at times. At least in the last game I think it’s hard to justify and arguably proved counterproductive. Ultimately, that’s a call for the coaching staff over the off season.

7 points
8
1
splitpea1's picture

January 28, 2021 at 05:37 pm

But how does the coaching staff break through Rodgers' will? You saw how open Lazard was in the "3 Plays That Make You Go Hmmm" article; yet Rodgers attempts a much more difficult completion to Davante.

7 points
7
0
jannes bjornson's picture

January 28, 2021 at 08:40 pm

On that play he just threw a bit high to Adams or it was a score. Lazard was wide open as the third option , right side. Rodgers has to work on his left to right progression for that look. We really don't need to remind him of the miss, he knows.

3 points
3
0
stockholder's picture

January 28, 2021 at 05:24 pm

15 mil. reasons. Thats what you pay Adams. If you want him to throw to other people. Dump Adams. Take him out. But you know thats not going to happen. I realize management walks on water now. Love is Blind. Much like the officials Sunday. But Rodgers decisions were one of frustration. He went with who he trusts. And will continue to do so. It's what happens when you have to claw your Team back in the game. He's the reason they returned to the playoffs. Time to stop the crying.

-5 points
5
10
gkarl's picture

January 29, 2021 at 07:56 am

"Love is Blind", a very true statement. The question then becomes who is doing the looking.

2 points
2
0
ricky's picture

January 28, 2021 at 05:39 pm

The same thing is happening to Rodgers as happened to Favre- he falls in love with a receiver, and even before the snap, he is throwing to that receiver. Even if there are others open, and his chosen receiver has double coverage, it's still going to him. But recall, there was a play when the ball was thrown to a well covered Lazard, while Adams was totally uncovered with an open path to the end zone in the second half. The announcers were astounded that Rodgers didn't see him. But Rodgers was fixated on Lazard, and so the ball went to him. For a guy who can scan the field and process so quickly and efficiently, he seems to be getting "tunnel vision" when he is facing pressure defenses.

6 points
8
2
PF4L's picture

January 28, 2021 at 05:42 pm

Leave it to Packer fans...

They have the NFL's MVP QB , 48 Td's..5 picks...121.5 P. Rating..84.3 QBR. But that's not good enough, he needs to be better!!...JC people...STFU already.
.
Gets no help in the off season. Has a receiver with a 50% catch rate, and you bring up trust issues?
Show me an NFL QB who doesn't need to trust his receivers, and i'll show you a QB who won't be in the league very long.

-1 points
4
5
jannes bjornson's picture

January 28, 2021 at 08:41 pm

Agreed.

1 points
2
1
barutanseijin's picture

January 28, 2021 at 05:56 pm

Does he really look for the other guys when he’s up against a strong pass rush?

And if he thinks throwing into double coverage is his best option, i gotta ask: How’s that working out for him? Just how “cerebral “ is it to keep doing something that isn’t working?

3 points
7
4
Duneslick's picture

January 29, 2021 at 03:26 pm

You dont have time to look for other guys when you are against a strong pass rush

1 points
1
0
MarkinMadison's picture

January 28, 2021 at 06:01 pm

I said it after the Rams game - you take Davante Adams out of the equation and every WR who caught a catch that day caught 50% of the balls thrown their way or less. Missed balls = interception chances, especially in a packed end zone. MVS did better against the Bucs, but the others did not, and he is still very up and down. I do think these guys have not reached their ceiling yet. I do think Lazard can be a legit #2. I do think MVS can be more consistent. But they are not there yet.

3 points
3
0
ImaPayne's picture

January 28, 2021 at 07:56 pm

can't get better knowing the ball ain't coming your way. that's the problem, they know it's Adams is getting it. they never get sharp.

3 points
4
1
Swisch's picture

January 28, 2021 at 06:19 pm

Maybe the problem with Aaron Rodgers not trusting his receivers is with Aaron Rodgers.
If Rodgers saw Lazard break wide open for a touchdown and didn't throw it to him, are we supposed to think that Lazard isn't trustworthy to make such an easy catch? That seems ridiculous.
If Rodgers is still a top quarterback in overall ability, then we should be analyzing his attitude.
The most urgent question for the Packers is whether Aaron Rodgers is highly coachable and the kind of teammate who can get us from where we are now to a victory in the Super Bowl?
If other fans disagree with me on the importance of this question, I'm glad to hear their defenses of Rodgers.
Please tell me if you think he is willing to give way to our head coach, and whether he brings out the best in our wide receivers -- not only during the regular season, but in the biggest moments of the playoffs.
I like Aaron Rodgers, and am a big fan, but still have hard questions for him.
I think the main question for us to consider: Can we trust Aaron Rodgers?

5 points
8
3
Fabio's picture

January 29, 2021 at 04:45 am

Hi Swisch, your I believe are legitimate questions. But I'll give you three more:
1 - If we had reversed the Qs and we had had the GOAT how do you think the game would have ended? (consider that in a game where Brady had low / medium pressure he shot 3 hallucinating int's - I wonder what we would have said for just one of those crap thrown by Rodgers)
2 - If we remove Rodgers, how many games would we have won with another Q?
3 - Rodgers is getting old and this, besides being normal, is there for all to see. He has had high yields when the D line protects him (and this year they have worked wonders). Unfortunately in the match they did not repeat the performance vs Rams. Plus, when Rodgers turned to St. Brown in a critical situation (conv. 2pt) he failed with a ball in hand. So, in conclusion, could it not be that Rodgers turned to Admas because he knew he had little time available? (although he had time on Lazard, but the decision-making process was already taken ....)
GPG

4 points
5
1
Swisch's picture

January 29, 2021 at 08:23 am

Hey, Fabio, I'm all in with Rodgers if he is all in with Coach MLF and his teammates.
I'm okay with his imperfections if he is willing to follow his coach and work with his receivers.
As you indicate, a somewhat flawed Rodgers is still a great quarterback. I don't expect him to be perfect.
What is necessary, it seems to me, is that Rodgers gives way to his head coach. especially in critical situations of playoff games; and that he tries to get his other receivers involved in the offense, even if the main focus is understandably Davante.
Maybe Rodgers has been doing this kind of compliance and cooperation all along, and there's no problem.
However, is Rodgers has been subtly subverting MLF, if he has been overly selective in going to Davante to the detriment of his other receivers -- well, then, it seems he has to make a decision about whether he wants to change.
A quarterback undermining a head coach would seem to undermine the whole team. Freezing out guys is bad for morale and involvement and energy.
I want Aaron Rodgers to remain a Packer and lead us to another Super Bowl. I'm a big fan; I like the guy; and I think he can get us there
However, if he is a difficult person to work with and unwilling to make changes, my concern is that we'll continue to have heartaches in the biggest of games.
To finish, I'm really glad for your response, Fabio, and the opportunity to talk football. I can be way off on my understanding of situations, and am glad for other thoughtful comments.

1 points
1
0
Fabio's picture

January 29, 2021 at 10:39 am

Hi Swisch
It is a pleasure for me to be able to discuss football with you (I'm Italian and maybe I'm not very competent ... so sorry if I sometimes say blatantly incorrect things) I fully agree that Rodgers must be on the same line as MLf. We must understand if the choices were the result of decisions of one or the other. My impression is that the running game was not very dominated in the game so, given the difficulties, maybe they didn't want to waste an attempt .... but this is just my thought.
Greetings from Italy
GPG

2 points
2
0
jannes bjornson's picture

January 29, 2021 at 01:37 pm

Niente di che

1 points
1
0
croatpackfan's picture

January 29, 2021 at 09:42 am

I will repeat myself, again. Father time did not affect Aarons arm strength, but it looks like time affect a little of precision and his vision of the field. He maybe slow a little in his progressions and that is why he forcing the ball to the 1st target.

If he will admit what is happening, I'm certain he will be able to avoid those little, but significant, mistakes and play at least another if not another 2 MVP seasons.

I do not see another QB at the moment who will better suit for the Packers. But considering that it does not mean that he is flawless.

For your point 3, you were using that point 2 conversion that failed. And, yes that was ESB mistake, but, when we are talkin about Davante, do you remember free play Aaron get from offside, when he threw the ball to Dafney, but Adams was 15 yards alone down the field 20 yards from the end zone. Or how he overthrew MVS twice, once on the right line another on the left line of the field. Obviously, our Aaron Rodgers does not scan field with same quickness and same precision as he was doing earlier in his career. It is OK, but everybody can noticed that. Also, DC from other teams noticed his habit to go to Davante when he is in doubtful and important situations. That is why he always have problem with double or triple coverage on Davante.

1 points
1
0
Fabio's picture

January 29, 2021 at 10:44 am

Hi
As I told you I think the fact that Rodgers is getting old is on everyone's eyes (that's why he makes mistakes that maybe he never would have made before), but I will continue to take it on all the other Qs except Mahomes and maybe Wilson ..... but the question is: Will there ever be a time when our D can make up for some error in our Q ??????? All the teams that go to the SB have Ds that succeed in this (because no Q makes mistakes - think of Brady who threw three shits !!!)
Greetings from Italy
GPG

1 points
1
0
Bear's picture

January 28, 2021 at 06:21 pm

When Adams was injured and out of the lineup the Packers won! Rodgers was forced to use his other receivers!
To me that’s the difference between Brady and Rodgers, Brady wins with no name receivers.
When watching the games 2 or three times you see Rodgers really focused on Adams and not throwing to wide open receivers.
I doubt if Rodgers would very often throw to a rookie even if he was a first round pick, not in his DNA.

11 points
12
1
jannes bjornson's picture

January 28, 2021 at 08:47 pm

Why did MVS have a great game, if he didn't notice him?

-1 points
1
2
dobber's picture

January 29, 2021 at 07:25 am

The question is: would MVS have more great games if ARod noticed him more?...or would we spend more time lamenting his drop rate and lapses in concentration?

3 points
3
0
Coldworld's picture

January 29, 2021 at 02:00 pm

Good summation. I suspect the answer may be different depending on the stage of the season at which the question was posed.

The big issue for me was the lack of a healthy Lazard. We had no reliable 4th option. EQ had moments, when he has the ball in his hands he can look exciting. At other times he seems out of it. We need 4, preferably 5 receivers. I think we started with 2, list Lazard for much of the year while gaining MVS by growth. By the playoffs we arguably had 3. EQ may yet emerge but we can’t bank on it it health. We need some new competition and depth. Preferably one of whom can play slot/option.

1 points
1
0
jannes bjornson's picture

January 30, 2021 at 09:51 am

Need a quick slot guy. You have to get to the spot fast.

1 points
1
0
Duneslick's picture

January 29, 2021 at 03:29 pm

Bradys no name receivers Mike Evans (pro bowl) Chris Godwin (pro bowl) Antonio Brown, Gronk, Cameron Brate. As a group twice as good as Greenbay

3 points
3
0
Dragon5's picture

January 28, 2021 at 06:22 pm

I was researching the other day for WR upgrades and came up with Marquise Brown (OX), Darius Slayton (RAT), and Breshad Perriman (ROOSTER), with Perriman the most likely as an UFA. Based on expectations, they all had down years, suggesting value to interested buyers. Perriman also appeared on a PFF article a couple days ago. Brown is in the same mold as MVS with MVS being less expensive. MVS, however, will be the most at risk player for injury next year on our current squad--7 life path entering a 7 personal year--that's as risky as it gets. I warned Crosby and Bahktiari were most at risk this past year...just saying. Should the Giants go big on receiving upgrades in the draft, I wonder how expendable Slayton would become--a great route runner that has a knack for YAC. Tate is also a likely cap casualty with only $4.7m of dead money that could hit the market, but given the age, drama, and a DRAGON in an OX year, I wouldn't have high hopes for him to outperform.

Last February, I suggested Danny Amendola (OX) as a slot WR veteran presence that Aaron would be able to trust...

"Food for thought...if the Packers offensive roster took 3/4 of a season to get LaFleur's system down, what impact can one expect of a rookie or FA WR? Let's not forget Rodgers "trust" issues. Need seasoned vets that will adjust quickly and develop chemistry with Aaron. To, me Amendola checks all the boxes: experience, value, victor in 2 of 3 Super Bowls."

He had a damn good grade from [email protected], better than any receiver sans Adams on our roster. Would have been an intriguing alternative to forcing it to Adams.

-3 points
1
4
jannes bjornson's picture

January 28, 2021 at 08:48 pm

Better check the draft board for your Ox friendly WR.

4 points
4
0
Keecolen's picture

January 28, 2021 at 06:36 pm

Unfortunately he didn’t look Davante’s way on the free play when he chose to throw to Daphne instead. Adams was wide open downfield on the left sideline.

4 points
4
0
jannes bjornson's picture

January 28, 2021 at 08:49 pm

Cannot see everything at once....Pass rush coming fast, amigo.

-2 points
0
2
canadapacker's picture

January 28, 2021 at 07:21 pm

Probably the worst and most biased article written by Ken this year. Think that it is an armchair quarterback but with some dumb assumptions. It is NOT about trust - it is about design and his willingness to help guys get records. Now his favourites in the gold zone were both Adams and Tonyon - both who were setting club and individual records. And the play designs were that way. He goes to the open guy and sometimes looks to his favorites first and will run out of time if the rush is onto him - but he throws it to the open guy and if he has one on one with Davante how many times does he throw it to him in only a place where he can catch it - like always and Davante dropped one on that Sunday. It is not about good receivers or having better receivers - they all are good they all get open and they all led the Pack to having a record season - despite having a few drops and the Pack didnt have a guy with more than 4 drops unlike other teams. Tyrik Hill has 6 and Jeudy and Lamb ( both rookies had 9 each). The problem with the Gold Zone in the playoffs is that they took away Adams and we needed more inventive plays and maybe a run or two instead of 3 passes. One think that I believe that we really missed was a slot guy like Cobb/Beasley type of inside tough guy. Adams can play there but that is risking him getting hurt. I dont believe for a minute that AR did not throw to an open guy because he didnt trust - I do believe that he may have throw to a covered Adams because he knows that Adams will come up with a contested catch - the same way that he used to throw to Jordy down the sideline because he knew Jordy would catch the ball and get his feet down. Big Big Difference. I am getting tired of this crazy BS about the Packers lost because they didnt have receivers - we lost because of a couple of bad calls - PI - because of not catching a 2 point conversion - because of Jones fumble and because of not scoring twice in the Gold zone due to bad play calling. And probably would of won the game outright if we get the ball back with 1 minute left.

-4 points
1
5
Irish_Cheesehead's picture

January 28, 2021 at 07:29 pm

Sorry, but Brady won in NE with #5 and #6 receivers. Great QBs elevate those around him. Sure, I'd love to see the Packers get another stud receiver. But that's still no excuse for Rodgers.

6 points
9
3
jannes bjornson's picture

January 28, 2021 at 08:52 pm

Tell Jones not to fumble twice and the DBs to pick a gift and understand coverage after four years in the League and we're all talking about the SB right now. What's your excuse?

1 points
2
1
Fabio's picture

January 29, 2021 at 04:52 am

I would have liked to see Brady with Gb's defenses and with MM coach .....

2 points
3
1
Fabio's picture

January 29, 2021 at 05:11 am

I don't know if I am saying wrong things, but I would like to express a reflection ..... this is the TEAM sport par excellence. How many times in Brady's hits have we seen breakthrough shows done not by Brady? I believe many times. Just think of Butler intercepting Wilson and Edelman taking a ridiculous hold on two Ds ...... Now I bring the same question about GB. Excluded against Chicago in the 2010 NFC final (coincidentally after SB) how many times has someone made a decisive show that was not Rodgers? Rodgers, like all humans, can be wrong, but I think we have become so used to his performance of excellence and exceptionality that we always expect more than we should from him. Could it be that it masked the many great flaws that teams have constantly had over the years? Particularly in recent years, is there anyone who thinks they have lost to weaker teams than GB? (for me this year maybe we were equal as a team value but weaker as an overall talent and I think we have seen this) Very often the needs of the team have been under everyone's eyes, but have they ever been seriously addressed? (Tampa bought a lot of talent this year and Wirfs in the 1st round of the Draft, we chia had as first choice on the pitch?) I hope and believe that next year (barring injuries) can be a further evolution of the game, but in the 2020, for GB's sake we should trade Rodgers (if Love is ready) and restart a new philosophy
Greetings to all
GPG

0 points
2
2
ImaPayne's picture

January 28, 2021 at 07:41 pm

My observation from the receivers veiw. You run your route no ball. Adams. You repeat, ball to rb.
After a while your not expecting ball, Rodgers has trained you now to think, ball not coming my way.
wow shocked ball is there but I flub it, why, haven't had one thrown may way in a while not prepared.
Reverse that, who gets all the balls and make catches, the guy with the most practice, the guy mentally expecting and looking for ball.
This is a coaching issue to work with QB to spread it around.
MVS doesn't have bad hands, it's shock the ball was thrown to him.
2. Brady did pick on Sullivan and King. Other teams may not have weak sisters for Rodgers to exploit. The bucs were one of them and it was the diff of two teams.

1 points
3
2
stockholder's picture

January 28, 2021 at 08:49 pm

Conclusion: Rodgers needs to Force Green Bays hand and ask to be traded. Sounds like the Press is right. Thank you Arron Rodgers. Don't be an idiot.

-6 points
0
6
Starrbrite's picture

January 28, 2021 at 08:54 pm

I completely agree, Rogers simply did not trust the others to make critical catches...and I can’t say I blame him.

-3 points
1
4
PackFanatic99's picture

January 28, 2021 at 09:32 pm

I don't disagree with the premise of the article. I also noticed that on one of the 1st and goal drives Rodgers threw to Davante all 3 times. The other 2 times. Way too much.

I also agree that, as WE ALL said back last Spring, the Packers SHOULD HAVE picked a WR #1. That may have helped Probably would have.

But, I disagree with one point ON 3rd and goal when Rodgers threw to Davante (who caught it out of the end zone), Lazard was WIDE OPEN actually totally uncovered at the goal line since the DB had fallen down. Now, trust or no trust, an UNCOVERED WR who you don't trust totally is better than a stud WR who you trust who is semi covered at the very back of the end zone.

WHY didn't Rodgers see Lazard. When I replayed the play for like the first 5 times, I thought he had simply decided to throw it to Davante and started to cock his arm before Lazard became open. But as I watched it a bunch more times, I realized, no, Rodgers never looked over there, did not go through any progressions, did not see if Lazard or anyone else may be open, he ONLY LOOKED at Davante and threw it to him. Now, Davante was open a bit and Rodgers threw a perfect pass and Davante should have caught it IN BOUNDS in my opinion . He lost control of his body and was unaware where he was and instead of doing the quick double toe tap he lunged way out of bounds by about 2'.

Bottom line is Rodgers never even glanced at Lazard, never gave him a chance. Trust or no trust you throw to an uncovered man no matter what.

0 points
2
2
croatpackfan's picture

January 29, 2021 at 09:51 am

That play you are talking about, was bullet speed ball very high in the air. Davante catch the ball, bat was carried by the trajectory of the ball out the bounds. Look again. Add to that momentum of his moving and everything will be very clear to you. It was not catchable ball, for nobody, not for Adams, or at least not catchable in the borders of the "gold" zone.

0 points
0
0
Demon's picture

January 29, 2021 at 01:11 am

Do we really need to ask why AR sometimes forces the ball to 17? That question answered itself all season long and in the title game last week.

Question for you guys.... The play that AR didnt throw to a wide open Lazard...was that before or after the dropped TD pass? Was it before or after the pass in the endzone that went right behind Lazatd because he never looked for the ball?

Was AR forcing the ball to 17 more before or after ESB dropped the 2pt play that hit him in the hands?

There has been entirely too many dropped passes this year. Along with too many incidents of the receiver running the wrong route. Ask yourself, would you target a guy who just dropped a sure TD pass and immediately after you got creamed by a defender.

Yes the pack did have a top passing offense, but it never looked easy. Truth is they do need another top WR. Someone who can get open, runs the right route and catches the damn ball.

-2 points
2
4
canadapacker's picture

January 29, 2021 at 09:51 am

Guess who is in the Superbowl this year?? The teams that have had the 4th and 6th most drops - so dont give me the craap that we dont have the receivers - our offensive stats dont show that - we lost the game because of poor Gold zone plays, because of Jones 2nd half fumble and because King cant cover along with bad defensive strategy at the end of the 1st half case closed.

1 points
2
1
Crankbait's picture

January 29, 2021 at 06:52 am

I am sorry but I feel your article is pure hogwash. Rogers gets tunnel vision after getting smacked around and I do not think he actually sees these guys wide open. Tonyan has just as good of hands as anyone even Adams.
If Rogers does see them, he is making a huge mistake not throwing an easy high percentage pass to a wide-open receiver. Rogers was a big reason why we lost that game but of course he's a big reason why we were there in the game to begin with.
Just like Favre, Rogers lacks discipline in crunch time and the Packers coaching staff are too starstruck to coach Rogers and point out his flaws with him.

0 points
2
2
Since'61's picture

January 29, 2021 at 09:43 am

Ken, kudos to you for finally writing an article that corroborates what many have been posting all season.
That is, after Adams the Packers WR Corp is just not that good. This was clear during the NFCCG as the Bucs receivers were a much more efficient group than the Packers WRs besides Adams.

Rodgers throws to Adams because Adams gives him the best chance for success in big situations. Adams is his best option when the pass will be contested.

If MVS and Lazard played for Tampa they would be the # 4 and 5 receivers at best. They both play hard but Ken’s article is spot on.

It should also be noted that Adams had 30% of the targets during the season and he also had a little over 30% of the seasons total receptions. Another point is that Rodgers three to nine different receivers during the Bucs game so clearly he is not just looking for Adams.

It’s amazing to me that while we were going 14-3 we had few complaints about the play calling or the passing targets.
However, we lose in the NFCCG and all the theories emerge about Rodgers subverting MLFs play calls and his throwing to Adams. Yet, the obvious answers were viewed by everyone watching the game live. The defense allowed 3 TDs all from the 20 yard line or beyond. The worst with only 8 seconds remaining in the first half.

The offense for it’s part had some failures in execution such as Adam’s dropped TD pass, Jone’s fumble and ESBs dropped 2 point conversion. That is not too mention the OLs shaky performance allowing 5 sacks and 8 QB hits.

Then there is the lack of preparation for situational football resulting in questionable coaching decisions throughout the game. Such as, the coverage called on the Bucs end of half TD. Lack of snaps for Dillon, and in the number of running plays overall. Lack of motion and TE chips. Empty backfield on too many plays. And worst of all the decision to kick an FG on 4th and goal.

In big games you want to get the ball to your playmakers. For the Packers that’s Adams and Jones, and Tonyan in certain situations. Jones went down and that hurts. I would have given Dillon more of a chance. The bottom line is that as Ken writes we still need a legit #2 or 1A WR.
Thanks, Since ‘61

5 points
7
2
croatpackfan's picture

January 29, 2021 at 10:00 am

Sorry Since61. MVS was the best WR for Packers at NFCCG. Stats tell you that and MVS catch all the throws thrown to him if those throws were catchable.

I watched game 3 times and I can confirm that. No one drop! He was targeted 6 times, had 4 catches for 115 yards and TD. Two targets he did not catch was overthrown balls in his direction.

So, when you catch the time, please, re-watch the game and give me the arguments I'm not right!

Thank you!

-2 points
0
2
Since'61's picture

January 29, 2021 at 07:16 pm

Croat your post actually makes one of my points, specifically that Rodgers does not focus only on Adams. He does rely on Adams to make plays during crunch time. But plenty of teams and QBs rely on their best players at key points in the game.

Yes, MVS was probably the best Packer WR in the NFCCG. However one good game does not make him or anyone else a legitimate #2 WR.

During the season MVS had 33 receptions including the 2 playoff games. He had 3 games with zero receptions and 2 games with only 1 reception. Also he caught 52% of the passes thrown to him. Again not a great number for a #2 WR. These are not the numbers of a solid #2 WR. Remember this was his 3rd season in the league. He had good numbers for a rookie but not for a 3 year veteran.

MVS could become a #3 but he must become a better route runner and he must become more reliable at catching passes.

The Packers offense needs a #2 who runs good routes, had good hands and knows how to get open in the short to medium passing game. Someone like Randall Cobb would be perfect. In fact if we had a reliable #2 that would make MVS more effective as a deep threat because he would be covered by our opponents #3 or #4 DB. That becomes a favorable matchup for the Packers.

I’m hoping the Packers draft a WR in the early rounds during this year’s draft. We need another WR threat that defenses need to account for. Beyond that if MVS doesn’t improve next season he may not make it beyond his rookie contract.
33 receptions doesn’t cut it for a second contract.
Stay safe Croat. Thanks, Since ‘61

1 points
1
0
tonym's picture

January 29, 2021 at 03:02 pm

Agree, he needs to be throwing to the open man, especially if he's wide open. And his passes to Adams were way off the mark in the end zone. That said, the Bucs DB's played bump and run all game because they had no fear of getting beaten deep like Tyreek did. MVS caught them once and they missed on the other but this team needs a burner, deep threat to keep the secondary honest. A killer ILB would be nice too. And better tackling. And holding onto passes and interceptions. Halfway decent execution and they win.

0 points
0
0
CoachDino's picture

January 29, 2021 at 04:22 pm

Unfortiunately I think it simply came down to execution.
We know he trusts the other guys, he's had success with them. Remember Lazards numbers are practilly 1/2 seasons worth of games. Then the success Rodgers, the WRs and most importantly the team had when Devante was out. The big plays that Lazard and MVS have produced on a consistent basis.

The film study shows that these guys get open, granted they might not be the best at getting open but between the scheme and attention to Devante they are open with the best of them.

Between Rodgers being a bit off and DA not making the tough play the combination adeed up to the results.

Could you imagine if he didn't focus on him "Why wouldn't the best QB/WR combination in the league be by passed for another option"?

Why? because that's how this offense works. AR should of made a better pass, DA should of made the tough catch and AR needed to find the open rec.

No need to make more out of it than need be. Don't freak out stay the course. Plus, we even talk about it as there is no money for that type of move anyway. OT/CB are much more important draft picks especially to make the biggest impact the soonest.

0 points
1
1