How important was Alex van Pelt?

XPack

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
3,700
Reaction score
566
Location
Garden State
Tactics and team aside, had we retained Van Pelt, do you think AR would have adjusted better?

Not just in tactics, but at a interpersonal dynamic level, having Alex might have made a crucial difference imo.
 

PackinMSP

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 28, 2018
Messages
797
Reaction score
56
I don't think so. He didn't really have Aaron in the majority of his "prime years" but on the accuracy issues maybe

But the accuracy could also just be a plain regression in skill

He simply doesn't have that "out of this world" accuracy anymore like he used to


Many of his missed are overthrow, underthrow, behind, in the ground, too high, etc

He's just been bad honestly
 

gopkrs

Cheesehead
Joined
May 12, 2014
Messages
5,710
Reaction score
1,438
Not sure why. But he better fix it. And it is fixable. It is not like he looks scared back there. For some reason he is not leading the receivers like he should. I see that as the main problem. But he is showing a lack of touch at times also. Maybe he is thinking a little too much.
 

Pugger

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 26, 2008
Messages
2,725
Reaction score
841
Location
***** Gorda, FL
Not sure why. But he better fix it. And it is fixable. It is not like he looks scared back there. For some reason he is not leading the receivers like he should. I see that as the main problem. But he is showing a lack of touch at times also. Maybe he is thinking a little too much.

Is changing the offense at this stage of a career for a QB like him a bigger deal than at first perceived? :unsure:
 

Dantés

Gute Loot
Joined
Jan 21, 2017
Messages
12,116
Reaction score
3,036
This is all going to be inconclusive until we see AR in the system in year two. Ryan looked really uneven in his first year with Shanahan as well. Garoppolo has taken time to click in in SF.

Right now, it's unclear if it's that Rodgers is resistant, or just taking the normal amount of time that it usually takes to get comfortable in a new system.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
33,629
Reaction score
8,886
Location
Madison, WI
unless he could have made rodgers more self aware...not important at all. rodgers is an old dog that doesn't want to learn new tricks...yet.

There you go, if you add a word like "yet" to any definitive statement that you make, you have left yourself a perfect out when it actually turns out to be a false statement.
 

PackAttack12

R-E-L-A-X
Joined
Sep 16, 2016
Messages
6,500
Reaction score
2,157
There you go, if you add a word like "yet" to any definitive statement that you make, you have left yourself a perfect out when it actually turns out to be a false statement.
Lets see. We have gary glasses, and the Gary Translator 5000. Lets add 'garyisms' to the list now. We could start a whole dictionary.
 

BrokenArrow

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 14, 2017
Messages
2,973
Reaction score
1,416
I think it's technique. He's throwing a lot more on backfoot.

YES. This. His technique has regressed this year in a lot of situations. And I know this is a side note, but I'm getting SICK of him rolling his eyes and looking around the field for someone else to blame when he misses a wide open receiver. Seems like it's ALWAYS someone else's fault with him.

One area where AR can never hold a candle to Favre was his capacity as a leader. He was never too proud to take a mea culpa. Favre inspired his teammates to play their best. Rodgers tries to browbeat them into playing their best. I hope the Packers have a staff of geneticists working in the basement to produce the perfect Favre/Rodgers hybrid. Maybe they already have. Maybe he's living down there and he's already 8 years old, learning and training nothing but football. He will be a QB god!
 

Sky King

158.3
Joined
Sep 27, 2012
Messages
2,817
Reaction score
331
Location
Out of the clear blue western skies...
He was alleged to be significantly important to Rodgers as both a coach and a friend. His dismissal may very well have jaundiced Rodgers' view of McCarthy.

Rodgers hasn't played quite the same since. Then again, he's also grown older and further coaching and roster changes contribute to the overall synergy. As several posters have astutely mentioned, it takes time to fine-tune both team and individual performances and that process will always be broadly dynamic.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Tactics and team aside, had we retained Van Pelt, do you think AR would have adjusted better?

Not just in tactics, but at a interpersonal dynamic level, having Alex might have made a crucial difference imo.

While it seems Rodgers has had a great relationship with Van Pelt it might be worth mentioning that AVP hasn't been successful as the Bengals QB coach by any means, with the team ranking 28th in passer rating over the past two years.

I don't think so. He didn't really have Aaron in the majority of his "prime years" but on the accuracy issues maybe

But the accuracy could also just be a plain regression in skill

He simply doesn't have that "out of this world" accuracy anymore like he used to


Many of his missed are overthrow, underthrow, behind, in the ground, too high, etc

He's just been bad honestly

Once again, Rodgers never was the ultra accurate quarterback to begin with. While some of the blame definitely is on him a lack of talent at receiver and tight end contributes to him struggling as well.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
He was alleged to be significantly important to Rodgers as both a coach and a friend. His dismissal may very well have jaundiced Rodgers' view of McCarthy. Rodgers hasn't played quite the same since.
It's probably worth considering that Rodgers coming back with a plate and a dozen screws in his throwing shoulder was coincident with Van Pelt's departure. There are a variety of factors at play in the inconsistencies, Van Pelt as his QB whisperer may or may not be one of them. The receiving weaponry is another factor.

It has been observed elsewhere that the Packers have played a high percentage of decent or better defenses this year compared to, say, 2011. Even teams you might consider generally deficient, like Denver or Detroit, fielded pretty good defenses this year. I don't think it's mere coincidence that the offense got rolling against Detroit after Slay went out of the game. As the saying goes, the other guys get paid too and a high percentage of these defensive opponents have been earning that pay.
As simple as it sounds, aaron needs to get back to his basics in technique.
What basics? Rodgers has been throwing off every conceivable platform since forever in defiance of classic technique. I'm not sure anybody is even looking anymore for a guy who's chief qualification is the ability to stand tall in the pocket with a pretty point-and shoot. They want guys who are athletic, mobile and can throw off a variety of playforms.

Rodgers is still capable of making all the throws. It just has not been quite as frequently but not that far off. As for velocity, its still there, maybe a barely measureable tick off. You don't have to look any further than Graham's drop on the opening play against Detroit.

It's always been the case that the quickness of the release is more important than peak velocity, and Rodgers is still the quickest gun in the West. Of course, the faster the ball, the less margin for error, whether it's the receiver's time to adjust or having a rocket ball go off his hands. Trust is a factor--will the receiver be precisely where he needs to be to close that margin of error on a rifle shot. You'd have to sit down with Rodgers for a heart-to-heart to get to the bottom of the matter.

As for the sideline floaters, be aware there has been a gradual change in the style of CB play. It's rare anymore to see a perimeter CB run with his head around. It's a rare CB with the speed and technique who can do that without sacrificing separation. The gradual increase in big receivers with big catch radiuses without a sacrifice in speed has become problematic. Standard CB technique these days is to run with wideout, limit separation, read his eyes or his hands, and swat the ball. Nowadays the habit around the league is to loft it and let the WR adjust and compete for the ball. If you watched Wilson this past week what you would have seen is a lot of pop up throws. Or if you watched much of Josh Allen this season, he likes to throw rocket balls 40+ yards down the field--no margin for error and not much success.

Does Rodgers have all the physical tools at his disposal as he did 5 or 10 years ago? Evidently not. Is that plate in his shoulder a factor? Likely. If the gap so wide as these black-and-white past-adn-durrent comparisons make it out to be? No. He remains a dangerous player.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Poppa San

* Team Owner *
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
13,244
Reaction score
3,056
Location
20 miles from Lambeau
Even teams you might consider generally deficient, like Denver or Detroit, fielded pretty good defenses this year. I don't think it's mere coincidence that the offense got rolling against Detroit after Slay went out of the game. As the saying goes, the other guys get paid too and a high percentage of these defensive opponents have been earning that pay.
FYI Detroit ended the season dead last in pass defense. Their rush D was a smidge better than ours. That is why I think the game plan was to pass often and deep against them. Also why I was disappointed as to why it didn't work out.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
Is changing the offense at this stage of a career for a QB like him a bigger deal than at first perceived? :unsure:
Is the purported change as first perceived an exageration? LaFleur came in with the following modus operandi: establish the run and throw deep off play action. Both the coach and QB like their odds on quick stikes against single-high safety. There really is no evidence that this would be a short-pass, metriculate-down-the-field offense. That takes us back to the question of weaponry.
 

Pugger

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 26, 2008
Messages
2,725
Reaction score
841
Location
***** Gorda, FL
Is the purported change as first perceived an exageration? LaFleur came in with the following modus operandi: establish the run and throw deep off play action. Both the coach and QB like their odds on quick stikes against single-high safety. There really is no evidence that this would be a short-pass, metriculate-down-the-field offense. That takes us back to the question of weaponry.

But in the last 2 games I noticed the offense clicked well when they used a quick short passing game and Jones running the ball. The offense bogs down when they try to hit long bombs. :unsure:
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
FYI Detroit ended the season dead last in pass defense. Their rush D was a smidge better than ours. That is why I think the game plan was to pass often and deep against them. Also why I was disappointed as to why it didn't work out.
Detroit's defense was last in pass yards surrendered at 284 per game. The Packers gained more than that. Teams threw against them 611 times, second most in the league. That will lead to yards. Rodgers threw a ton of balls and exceeded their average, on the road.

Detroit's completion percentage against was 62.4%, pretty decent. Where Detroit's passer rating against took a hit was on the 33 TDs surrendered and only 7 INTs. But this game, compared to these stats, shows how narrow the margin between good and bad can be. 33 TDs is only 2 per game. Rodgers macthed that number. They also got one of their uncommon picks. Their bad vs. their good comes down to a couple of plays--and the 4th. quarter.

Besides being passed against a ton, they were also run against 7th. most in the league, only 49 times fewer than the most run against Bengals, about 3 per game difference. I'm not going to run all the numbers, but if the Lions didn't take the most defensive snaps in the league they were close to it.

Charles Davis mentioned during the broadcast how many games Detroit was leading in the 4th. quarter but could not finish. I don't remember the exact number but it was quite a few. That may be a function of being gassed given how many snaps they've been taking. An offense that cannot stay on the field can lead to bad defensive numbers. The Packers did gain 432 yards with 25 first downs--on 86 plays. Detroit's offense ran only 56. This is an extreme example how this has gone for Detroit this year.

But in the final analysis, you've seen that Detroit defense at least twice this season and can compare them to the Minnesota defense that you have seen at least twice, the latter statitically superior and one of the best from the standpoint of superficial numbers. Does your eye test say there's a radical disparity? Mine doesn't. At least for 3 quarters anyway. And that's how this game played out. I wouldn't call Detroit's defense "good", but I'd say they are respectable, and "respectable" is among the worst faced this season.

You know, the margin between good and bad can be very narrow. The 11-3 Seahawks have outscored their opponents in the aggreage by 7 points. Ordinarily you'd think that shoud be an 8-8 team. They've won a ton of close games, one score games. They win when they close and they've done that more often than not. Detroit has been outscored by 82 points. That's 5 1/2 points per game difference with Seattle. Detroit was not closing games.

All in all, at home, I don't find it all that surprising that Detroit's defense would keep then in the game.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
But in the last 2 games I noticed the offense clicked well when they used a quick short passing game and Jones running the ball. The offense bogs down when they try to hit long bombs. :unsure:
That may be. Take it up with the coach. My point is that this isn't about Rodgers going off the reservation. There is a meshing of predispositions.

I'd like to see more of what you suggest. About once per year I like to go back to those few consecutive quarters of football over a few games from a few years back. Consider this my ration.

Starting in the second half against Dallas, I forget precisely which year, the Packers went hurry-up, small-ball with Rodgers completing something like 19-21 in that half. It was one of those games where Montogomery caught some 10 or 12 balls. They followed that up with another small-ball effort, against the Bears I think it was. Somebody can refresh my memory but I think the Packers lost the first and won the second. Maybe not. They didn't go back that since over any extended period, McCarthy or LaFleur.

Anyway, I've come to accept that Aaron Rodgers is not Drew Brees, and this new coach doesn't have the profile where you'd expect him to want some radical change. Stylistic differences between the two are at the margins. When it's 1st. down, 2nd. and manageable, against a run front and single-high, these guys want to go deep. I'm still seeing 4 go-routes being run; Rodgers isn't the one drawing that up. And you know, Brees has only one ring as well.

Here's the thing. One play, one strike, gets you 7 points. A lot can go wrong along the way with an approach that requires 10, 12, 15 plays. Short of a turnover, there's nothing more deflating, and a boost to the opposing defense, than going all that way down the field and coming away with a FG. It seems to be there's more than the normal number of early down penalties getting things off track even if you want to go that way.

As a passive observer, it's a waste of time and energy to belabor some woulda-shoulda-coulda that's not happening. When you do that you end up obsessing over the things don't work and overlooking the things that are working. What's happened is the higher than normal number of misses has led some to say Rodgers has regressed to average passer status. I guess some think it is worse than that. Well, they may have been overlooking the great throws still being made. It's all a little off, not a lot. And again, there's the matter of the quality of the weapons and the trust therein.

Some might point to Rodgers lower than average TD count this year as one symptom. Elsewhere I've noted how many times the Packers have run the ball in on 1st. or 2nd. down in the Red Zone. In past years that didn't happen. Maybe if the running game was sh*tty like it had been for most of Rodgers career he'd have 3, 4, 5 more TD passes on close range throws.

All that said, you would think once in a while these guys would want to go small ball over a couple possessions to change things up. Maybe they have, but a penalty here, a two yard loss on a run over there, took them out of it, just like trailing late means putting the ball in the QBs hands.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

PackinMSP

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 28, 2018
Messages
797
Reaction score
56
Tbh with you all I'm pretty disappointed in AR for not getting it down the stretch

Sure it's a new offensive scheme and the receiving talent is not the greatest, but it's not like he's some young guy anymore

I felt like after 12-14 games with MLF, it would finally start to "click" . But actually he got worse as the season went on and after he turned 36 his numbers fell
 

rmontro

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
4,826
Reaction score
1,417
I felt like after 12-14 games with MLF, it would finally start to "click" . But actually he got worse as the season went on and after he turned 36 his numbers fell
Rodgers has always been a quick study, being a bright fellow. As the financial folk say though, past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results. Anyway, it might not be that he's not "getting it", it might just be that his accuracy isn't there - combined with other tendencies like holding the ball too long, which seems to be ingrained as part of his personality. A physical/skill/athleticism problem, as opposed to not having the scheme down. I'm sure they run a lot of the same plays McCarthy did.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
I'm not going to run all the numbers, but if the Lions didn't take the most defensive snaps in the league they were close to it.

You're right about the Lions defense having taken the most snaps in the league this season.

Charles Davis mentioned during the broadcast how many games Detroit was leading in the 4th. quarter but could not finish. I don't remember the exact number but it was quite a few.

The Lions led during the fourth quarter in 10 games this season while being tied in another one they lost.
 

gbgary

Cheesehead
Joined
May 12, 2017
Messages
3,420
Reaction score
185
Location
up the road from jerrahworld
But in the last 2 games I noticed the offense clicked well when they used a quick short passing game and Jones running the ball. The offense bogs down when they try to hit long bombs. :unsure:
that's the MLF O. he's given in and used it several times this year. hopefully next year he'll be running it full time. as his skill yet continues to diminish he'll have to. it's not too late to do it this year.
 
Top