17 Things I Saw vs the Packers

OP
OP
MontanaHawk05

MontanaHawk05

Well-known member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
18,380
Reaction score
1,182
Nice post. Nice work. Geno isn't an elite QB, though. There's only a few of those, Mahomes, Burrow, Allen, maybe Lamar. Elite means the tippy-top best of a bunch.
I added a qualifier or two. I see him make too many sit-up-and-stare throws in the game to dismiss him as average.

I'm also noticing a pattern of poor red-zone passing concepts that Geno is being saddled with. First, the Valentine interception was a bad call and is getting called out by multiple national pundits for having multiple receivers in the same zone. You don't do that against pro defensive backs - too big of an interception risk. (The play actually stood a better chance if Geno put more mustard on the throw and got it into the back corner.)

Packers

Then you had last week's umpteen-yard sack against the Jets, which fortunately didn't cost us the game.

Jets

I'm sorry, is Geno supposed to trust this? The sack was the BEST possible option in this scenario given that a bootleg run was cut off. This is classic "I think I'm still in college" stuff from Grubb. In college, your DB's can typically get just outboxed and outmuscled for jump balls even in looks like this, so you don't get burned for it. But not here.

That's why I'm so frustrated for Geno. Even Waldron didn't do stuff like THIS.
 

Ozzy

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
11,376
Reaction score
6,047
Nice post. Nice work. Geno isn't an elite QB, though. There's only a few of those, Mahomes, Burrow, Allen, maybe Lamar. Elite means the tippy-top best of a bunch.
I actually got bored and went through how everyone else in the league is playing, their lines, supporting casts etc and he’s actually lower than I thought for me. I’m not ready to say he’s not a good QB but he’s nowhere near elite. Like Soulfish said above though if we get good Geno these next few weeks we will be a playoff team and he’s capable playing good football at times. I’m rooting for him
 

Ozzy

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
11,376
Reaction score
6,047
I added a qualifier or two. I see him make too many sit-up-and-stare throws in the game to dismiss him as average.

I'm also noticing a pattern of poor red-zone passing concepts that Geno is being saddled with. First, the Valentine interception was a bad call and is getting called out by multiple national pundits for having multiple receivers in the same zone. You don't do that against pro defensive backs - too big of an interception risk. (The play actually could have worked thanks to a receiver getting open, but Geno didn't put enough mustard on the throw.)

View attachment 68683

Then you had last week's umpteen-yard sack against the Jets, which fortunately didn't cost us the game.

View attachment 68684

I'm sorry, is Geno supposed to trust this? The sack was the BEST possible option in this scenario given that a bootleg run was cut off. This is classic "I think I'm still in college" stuff from Grubb. In college, your DB's can typically get just outboxed and outmuscled for jump balls even in looks like this, so you don't get burned for it. But not here.

That's why I'm so frustrated for Geno. Even Waldron didn't do stuff like THIS.
I’ve seen other film guys like top billion say it’s a flood concept that you often see in the red zone. Lockett probably didn’t run the best route but regardless Geno hits the throw if he hits Lockett so to say it’s all Grubb or poor design isn’t the full story. This play was catastrophic because of Geno.

He does make multiple wow throws almost every game. Super talented for sure. Makes too many mistakes though especially this year.
 
OP
OP
MontanaHawk05

MontanaHawk05

Well-known member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
18,380
Reaction score
1,182
I’ve seen other film guys like top billion say it’s a flood concept that you often see in the red zone. Lockett probably didn’t run the best route but regardless Geno hits the throw if he hits Lockett so to say it’s all Grubb or poor design isn’t the full story. This play was catastrophic because of Geno.
I said this.

It's still not a good concept to run in the red zone, and they generally don't in the NFL, regardless of what your guy says. Most flood concepts have a go route and a flat route mixed in to stretch coverage vertically to avoid precisely the situation you're seeing in the Jets pic. Can't do that in the red zone. No QB worth his salt is going to throw into that.
 

hawks85

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 23, 2014
Messages
1,404
Reaction score
827
Location
Seattle, Washington
Unlike us, they've been in all their losses and haven't been blown out, the most was 10 points to Detroit. They didn't lose to those teams just like we did, our losses against the Lions and Bills were not close. Last year they went into Jerry's world and beat the doors off the Cowboys and were very close to upsetting the 49ers. Yeah the Cowboys are the Cowboys, but they weren't a bad team last year.
I'll agree. If our offense wasn't stinking up the place we could have won a few more games this year and the GB game would have been much closer. Our only upside in the GB loss is we did shut them down in the second half but it was too late.
 

Ozzy

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
11,376
Reaction score
6,047
I said this.

It's still not a good concept to run in the red zone, and they generally don't in the NFL, regardless of what your guy says. Most flood concepts have a go route and a flat route mixed in to stretch coverage vertically to avoid precisely the situation you're seeing in the Jets pic. Can't do that in the red zone. No QB worth his salt is going to throw into that.
he had Lockett open with this flood concept and not every flood concept had a vertical to clear. UCLA and others do use this type of play but it requires good routes which we didn’t get. Regardless though if Geno sees it it’s a catch and not a pick.

I’m not saying it’s a great playcall and I don’t like it either but Geno had other options than throwing it up for grabs.

I’m not saying you’re wrong, I actually agree with you for the most part. I’m just disagreeing on how much blame gets attached to who, slightly.
 

keasley45

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 4, 2010
Messages
4,948
Reaction score
8,916
Location
Cockeysville, Md
I agree with most everything you've said here, but I'll comment on a few I disagree with or add some notes on a few:

3. The Packers O-Line aren't super highly performing in run blocking (22nd in Run Block Win Rate, 15th in Run Stuff Rate) but they're a top 5ish pass blocking unit (which is good because Jordan Love still sucks under pressure). I bring this up, because it'll relate to my comment on #15...

10. I think the thing that's most annoying in this regards is this: We were a top 10 offense in 2022. Just outside top 10 in 2023. Nobody thinks we've had a good offensive line. Our run game production was near the bottom of the league both years.
So, what exactly do these people attribute our offense being good to? You can ignore every single QB stat in the world. Our offense was good and there is literally nothing else you can point at to explain why.
2024, yeah, we are struggling on offense. Completely ok with that assessment. But I'm sorry, you're going to need a lot more than a couple of cherry-picked plays to make me think the guys who has led back-to-back seasons of successful offense is the problem and not the brand-new unproven OC who has zero NFL experience whatsoever.

13. Speaking of that unproven OC, this was the first game where I started to be on the 'don't invite him back next year' train. I've taken a step back from that ledge, but, yeah... this guy needs to show me something against Minnesota.

15. So, the Packers O-Line aren't great at run blocking, but ran basically at will in the first quarter. The previous two weeks, despite how good we looked OVERALL on defense, we struggled out the gate against the other team's first drives. This is now a three game pattern. Macdonald is adjusting well, obviously, but with how little I trust Grubb once we fall behind, he's got to figure out what he's doing wrong with his opening defensive script.

17. I still think this defense is a really good one. We can smack talk Kyler Murray all we want (and trust me, I enjoy it), but the Cards are still a top 10* offense at this point in the season. Between them, Lions, Bills, and now Packers, that's 5 games against top 10 offenses.
I would say 5 games is a pretty legit number, and yet our defense still ranks top 10. So, to me, we have a legit defense that also has some issues that have prevented us from cracking the top 5.

Seahawks are a very comparable team to the Broncos and Chargers. A good team, sitting just outside the top 10, carried mostly by their defense. Unfortunately, we ran into a legit top 5 team in Green Bay and instead of rising to the challenge that game presented, we stumbled out of the gate. When you are what we are, you really can't afford to dig yourself a hole against a team like the Packers.

Fortunately, we get another shot against another top 5 team this coming Sunday, which is another opportunity to raise our game up. Hopefully, Geno is able to go, Mike Mac re-examines his opening gameplan on defense, and Grubb started that long look in the mirror on Monday morning instead of waiting for the offseason.

Cheers!

* Top 10 as measured by Offensive Efficiency
Great post, dude! Well done.
 

keasley45

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 4, 2010
Messages
4,948
Reaction score
8,916
Location
Cockeysville, Md
he had Lockett open with this flood concept and not every flood concept had a vertical to clear. UCLA and others do use this type of play but it requires good routes which we didn’t get. Regardless though if Geno sees it it’s a catch and not a pick.

I’m not saying it’s a great playcall and I don’t like it either but Geno had other options than throwing it up for grabs.

I’m not saying you’re wrong, I actually agree with you for the most part. I’m just disagreeing on how much blame gets attached to who, slightly.

Geno is making some dumb choices and our redzone offense is garbage. And why is it garbage? Because when you are down there, its all close quarters combat. You have to have muscle, attitude and be deceptive.

Grubbs game is 'stretch them out and hit them deep'. He doenst possess the playbook to thrive in those instances. The screens we run between the 20s when defenders are playing off, dont work when everyone is within 10 yards of the LOS.

Dont know why the hell the guys on O cant just sit down in a room together, watch tape of a few really good redzone offenses and just crib the plays they run.

And before abyone says 'the line cant block', I'd like to see proof of the team actually having a coherent redzone strategy and it failing because of the line. More often than not we are Fing up on short yard distances because we still throw more than we run and then throw oodd patterns rather than creating misnatches between Fant and a Safety or DK and a lesser CB or LB.

You hear Mac say 'they ran a lot of motion which confused us on D and let them get us for big yards'...

Where is the deception on a regular basis? When are we ever creating mismatches?
Grubb is brilliant at doing what he knows how to do. Problem is, he doenst know the pro game very well yet.
 

cymatica

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 25, 2014
Messages
5,156
Reaction score
3,923
I said this.

It's still not a good concept to run in the red zone, and they generally don't in the NFL, regardless of what your guy says. Most flood concepts have a go route and a flat route mixed in to stretch coverage vertically to avoid precisely the situation you're seeing in the Jets pic. Can't do that in the red zone. No QB worth his salt is going to throw into that.

That's what I thought. Maybe it works near or just outside the 20, but it just looked way too condensed.
 

Lagartixa

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 6, 2020
Messages
2,124
Reaction score
3,693
Location
Taboão da Serra, SP, Brazil
Nice post. Nice work. Geno isn't an elite QB, though. There's only a few of those, Mahomes, Burrow, Allen, maybe Lamar. Elite means the tippy-top best of a bunch.

D00d... Allen and "maybe Lamar"? In what universe?

Allen is getting all the MVP hype from the talking-head mediots, but Jackson has been clearly superior. Jackson's ANY/A (adjusted net yards per passing attempt, which takes into account TDs, interceptions, and sacks - I'll put the formula at the bottom of this comment for those who want to see it) on passes is way higher, plus his YPC on rushes is way higher. That is, Jackson produces a lot more more than Allen both on each rushing play and on each passing play.

How much more is Jackson producing on passing plays than the rest of the league? The difference between Jackson's otherworldly 9.38 ANY/A and that of Allen in second place at 8.20 is bigger than the difference between Allen's ANY/A and that of Sam Darnold, ninth in the league at 7.13. The ninth-most-effective passer in the league this season has been closer in performance to the second-most-effective than the second-most-effective has been to the clear MVP.

Formula for ANY/A:
pass_yds + (20 * pass_TD) - (45 * int) - sack_yds ANY/A = ---------------------------------------------------- (pass attempts + sacks)
 
Last edited:

NoGain

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 28, 2022
Messages
2,965
Reaction score
3,089
If I'm in a playoff game against a top team, I'm taking Allen as my QB over Lamar. Maybe just me. Hell, I'm taking Burrow over Lamar, and, of course, Mahomes.
 

SoulfishHawk

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 6, 2012
Messages
34,509
Reaction score
15,173
Location
Sammamish, WA
Burrow is a flat-out beast. Cold blooded. It's almost always his Defense that blows it for that team. It's crazy how many close losses they have this year.
 

Ozzy

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
11,376
Reaction score
6,047
D00d... Allen and "maybe Lamar"? In what universe?

Allen is getting all the MVP hype from the talking-head mediots, but Jackson has been clearly superior. Jackson's ANY/A (adjusted net yards per passing attempt, which takes into account TDs, interceptions, and sacks - I'll put the formula at the bottom of this comment for those who want to see it) on passes is way higher, plus his YPC on rushes is way higher. That is, Jackson produces a lot more more than Allen both on each rushing play and on each passing play.

How much more is Jackson producing on passing plays than the rest of the league? The difference between Jackson's otherworldly 9.38 ANY/A and that of Allen in second place at 8.20 is bigger than the difference between Allen's ANY/A and that of Sam Darnold, ninth in the league at 7.13. The ninth-most-effective passer in the league this season has been closer in performance to the second-most-effective than the second-most-effective has been to the clear MVP.

Formula for ANY/A:
pass_yds + (20 * pass_TD) - (45 * int) - sack_yds ANY/A = ---------------------------------------------------- (pass attempts + sacks)
This is where numbers fall short though. It’s obvious Allen has to do more with his team than Lamar does. I think it’s super close but wouldn’t say one is way better than the other so far. Those two and Burrow(who has no line either) are all playing out of this world.
 

NoGain

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 28, 2022
Messages
2,965
Reaction score
3,089
Lamar is an unbelievable talent and a stat king. But when the stakes are high, I'd choose the other three over him. Hell, the Ravens biggest divisional rivalry is against the Steelers, and I think Lamar's only beaten them like once, if my memory serves me correct.
 

cymatica

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 25, 2014
Messages
5,156
Reaction score
3,923
Burrow is a flat-out beast. Cold blooded. It's almost always his Defense that blows it for that team. It's crazy how many close losses they have this year.
He cemented his cold blooded beast status when he went into KC in the Championship game when he bitch slapped Kermit
 

Lagartixa

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 6, 2020
Messages
2,124
Reaction score
3,693
Location
Taboão da Serra, SP, Brazil
Lamar is Kyler XL

That's just silly. Jackson is a two-time league MVP who is both the best passing QB and the best rushing QB in the league this season, and both by wide margins.

If you'd like to bet that Kyler Murray will win even one NFL MVP award or that he'll be the best passing QB in the league at any point in his career, I'll be willing to bet against either or both of those things happening. I wouldn't have been willing to make that bet after his age-24 season, but I am now.

Both players are currently 27 years old. It's amazing how different that same number looks on the two of them. Jackson has already won two league-MVP awards and is clearly the most productive player in the league this season, and he's still just 27. Meanwhile, Murray is already 27, undersized, and uh... hasn't really done a whole lot yet.
 
Top