Identity

[XPack]

Can anyone definite what identity is? What was it under Favre or under MM?

 

[adambr2]

I am not writing it off. I am saying they are smart talented people who will learn and adjust to the loss and come out better on the other side.

I have faith!!!!

Unfortunately there are also smart, talented people on the other sidelines, and as we saw on Sunday there is a pretty big talent gap between the two teams. You can't just scheme your way out of it when the other team is just a lot better.

 

[Packerlover]

Why do teams need an "Identity?" Meaning a team that depends on the run game or a team that depends on the passing game or a team that depends solely on their defense. The NFL is complicated, each game presents different challenges. Those teams that can adapt and change schemes on both sides of the ball when needed depending on the opponent usually win, would that be considered an Identity?" I think the Packers have done that so far this season.

 

[Dantés]

I think it is. Though no fault of Adams.

Our game plan suddenly dropped everything that was working during Adams absence and suddenly just went "let's throw to Adams". Rather than integrating Adams with the previous game plan, we changed it totally. We stopped scheming other receiver's open and we're predictable.

Adams return is the causation but nothing on him personally. Out tactics didn't adapt well.

Our gameplans absolutely did not do that.

 

[Packerlover]

Our gameplans absolutely did not do that.

They most certainly did in 8 games

 

[Dantés]

They most certainly did in 8 games

You think that for 8 games, the Green Bay Packers game plan has been "who cares what works, let's throw it to Adams"?

That's asinine.

 

[Packerlover]

You think that for 8 games, the Green Bay Packers game plan has been "who cares what works, let's throw it to Adams"?

That's asinine.

That's not what I'm saying at all, the Packers adapted well when Adams was out and right now they will adapt to the teams we have coming up next.

 

[PackAttack12]

Well I just listened to LaFleur’s postgame presser and his Monday presser, and he alluded to (among other things) something of an over reliance to Davante in both.

Again, there’s other variables to the equation as well. But to suggest that it doesn’t exist, when the head coach acknowledges that it does, is a bit naive.

Davante needs to be featured heavily in the offense, but not to the detriment of the overall flow.

 

[Dantés]

That's not what I'm saying at all, the Packers adapted well when Adams was out and right now they will adapt to the teams we have coming up next.

Sorry that I misunderstood you.

 

[OldSchool101]

Well. I know some posters might get their feelings hurt. But the only identity I see is a team that is dynamic in its inconsistency. How do you get a perfect passer rating one week... then have the worst game of a 14 year career the next??

In the business world they call that porpoising.
That’s a troublesome sign of instability and eventually leads to a crash if left unattended. It’s not a simple fix but it is fixable. You identify the primary areas of concern and form a solution and tracking process. Then you respond by doing a check up from the neck up (awareness and taking personal responsibility) and meeting regularly to study the issue and effect a strategy to overcome it and then track it with a focus to the micrometer.

Personally. I don’t see that happening in several key areas as is obvious by the same repeated failures caused partly by not put corrective measures in place to fix it. Namely, ST and run D and TE coverage (or non coverage in this case) then a vacant and substandard ILB dilemma and O sloppiness.

Unfortunately our opponent has intricately studied this and is successfully exploiting it.

 

[adambr2]

Well I just listened to LaFleur’s postgame presser and his Monday presser, and he alluded to (among other things) something of an over reliance to Davante in both.

Again, there’s other variables to the equation as well. But to suggest that it doesn’t exist, when the head coach acknowledges that it does, is a bit naive.

Davante needs to be featured heavily in the offense, but not to the detriment of the overall flow.

Exactly this. No one is suggesting Davante Adams isn't the best receiver this team has and doesn't make us better when our offense is working correctly. And yes, there are other factors.

But to suggest it's just absolute pure coincidence that offensive success has eluded us in his return and has absolutely nothing to do with his utilization and the rhythm with the offense I feel is burying one's head in the sand.

 

[adambr2]

Do you remember the Chargers game? That team is not a juggernaut. But in that particular game, they steam-rolled our offensive line and rendered our entire offense ineffective, much in the same way that the Niners did on Sunday night. How anyone watches those games and thinks that the Rodgers-Adams connection is the problem is beyond me.

Adams does not get "force fed" in an effort to "make him the offense." He gets more targets than the other receivers because he is far and away the best of any of the pass catching options.

The Raiders, Cowboys, and Chiefs (esp. Chiefs w/out Chris Jones) do not have good defenses.

Do you remember the Chiefs' game? It appears not. Rodgers was under siege the entire night. He actually was sacked 5 times and was hit 12 times compared to 3 sacks and 7 QB hits by the Charger defense!

Yet the Packer offense was still able to function just fine that game without Adams despite the fact that our line was "steam-rolled" in that game even worse than the Charger game.

So the theory that strong pass rushes have just been rendering our entire offense ineffective and that's the only piece of the puzzle, doesn't hold any water when you look at it in the context of what we were able to accomplish in Kansas City. The fact that you admitted the Chargers aren't a juggernaut but just insisted that it was their pass rush that took away our entire offense, and then turn around and say the Chiefs don't have a good defense despite actual statistical evidence that their pass rush was even more effective against us than the Chargers, pretty clearly shows that you either did not accurately remember the Chiefs' game or have simply taken a side and aren't going to be open to changing your opinion no matter what evidence I present.

 

[swhitset]

Do you remember the Chargers game? That team is not a juggernaut. But in that particular game, they steam-rolled our offensive line and rendered our entire offense ineffective, much in the same way that the Niners did on Sunday night. How anyone watches those games and thinks that the Rodgers-Adams connection is the problem is beyond me.

Adams does not get "force fed" in an effort to "make him the offense." He gets more targets than the other receivers because he is far and away the best of any of the pass catching options.

The Raiders, Cowboys, and Chiefs (esp. Chiefs w/out Chris Jones) do not have good defenses.

You may be correct. I am skeptical.

 

[ls1bob]

Our special teams sure has identity. They are BAD. When other teams intentionally kick off short of the goal line so you can attempt a return,you are bad.

 

[Dantés]

Do you remember the Chiefs' game? It appears not. Rodgers was under siege the entire night. He actually was sacked 5 times and was hit 12 times compared to 3 sacks and 7 QB hits by the Charger defense!

Yet the Packer offense was still able to function just fine that game without Adams despite the fact that our line was "steam-rolled" in that game even worse than the Charger game.

So the theory that strong pass rushes have just been rendering our entire offense ineffective and that's the only piece of the puzzle, doesn't hold any water when you look at it in the context of what we were able to accomplish in Kansas City. The fact that you admitted the Chargers aren't a juggernaut but just insisted that it was their pass rush that took away our entire offense, and then turn around and say the Chiefs don't have a good defense despite actual statistical evidence that their pass rush was even more effective against us than the Chargers, pretty clearly shows that you either did not accurately remember the Chiefs' game or have simply taken a side and aren't going to be open to changing your opinion no matter what evidence I present.

If you think that the line and offense as a whole functioned worse in the Chiefs game compared to the Chargers game, I can't help you.

 

[HardRightEdge]

While this is absolutely true, there's been quite a bit of force feeding to Davante since he came back from the injury.

I wouldn't call 33 targets/21 catches/64% over the last three games "force feeding". 64% is actually quite decent for a wideout when you consider QB completion percentages get padded by higher percentage throws to RBs, and in some offenses also the slots and/or TEs.

Adam's completion % for is 66.7% for 2019 to date, the highest of his career.

How time flies. It seems like only yesterday he was a bust and not making the roster after this second season.

 

[Dantés]

I wouldn't call 33 targets/21 catches/64% "force feeding". 64% is actually quite decent for a wideout when you consider QB completion percentages get padded by higher percentage throws to RBs, and in some offenses also the slots and/or TEs.

But when the rest of the offense is laced with all pro wide receivers, why give so much run to just one guy?

 

[gbgary]

i agree that they're forcing the ball to adams and it's hurting the O. heard some stats yesterday on 105.7 the fan in milwaukee confirming it and it's pretty obvious. when adams was out the ball was going everywhere and the O was looking pretty good. since...not so much. other guys are getting open but they're going to the first read which is almost alway adams. it's making the O predictable.

 

[Dantés]

i agree that they're forcing the ball to adams and it's hurting the O. heard some stats yesterday on 105.7 the fan in milwaukee confirming it and it's pretty obvious. when adams was out the ball was going everywhere and the O was looking pretty good. since...not so much. other guys are getting open but they're going to the first read which is almost alway adams.

Targeting Adams more than the rest of the pass catching options does not equate to force feeding.

The correlation of Adams being back for the LA and SF games does not mean causation.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Can anyone definite what identity is? What was it under Favre or under MM?

"Identity" is the consistent ways by which a team wins and loses. If those consistencies cannot be identified then the team lacks a clear identity. As for the 2019 Packers, there are some patterns in the wins:

1. Good red zone offensive performance
2. Good red zone defensive performance
3. Poor 3rd. down offensive performance on balance
4. Getting to the red zone by chunk plays on 1st. and 2nd. down.
5. + on turnovers

Failure to be on the winning side of 1, 2, 4 and 5 leads to close games or losses. This is especially noticable in the Philly loss and Carolina win, games that came down to what amounts to final plays at the goal line.

Favre, McCarthy? Identity changes from year to year with roster and coaching turnover, differing positional strengths and philosophies. There is one consistancy over the nearly past three decades: QBs that like to look deep and who will look deep first and go playground on the play extension.

 

[PackAttack12]

I wouldn't call 33 targets/21 catches/64% over the last three games "force feeding". 64% is actually quite decent for a wideout when you consider QB completion percentages get padded by higher percentage throws to RBs, and in some offenses also the slots and/or TEs.

Adam's completion % for is 66.7% for 2019 to date, the highest of his career.

How time flies. It seems like only yesterday he was a bust and not making the roster after this second season.

But when the rest of the offense is laced with all pro wide receivers, why give so much run to just one guy?

You can call it force feeding, you can call it over reliance, or whatever you want to call it. All I'm saying is, in my opinion, it's been a part of the problem. Not the main problem, not the only problem. The head coach agrees with me, as evidenced by his comments.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Which is fine. But when in doubt, I'm going to defer to the head coach.

 

[HardRightEdge]

i agree that they're forcing the ball to adams and it's hurting the O. heard some stats yesterday on 105.7 the fan in milwaukee confirming it and it's pretty obvious.

What were those stats? The problem isn't throwing the ball to Adams. It's what they do on the other plays. It would have also helped to not play a team that's on pace to give up the fewest passing yards in the last 40 years.

 

[Dantés]

You can call it force feeding, you can call it over reliance, or whatever you want to call it. All I'm saying is, in my opinion, it's been a part of the problem. Not the main problem, not the only problem. The head coach agrees with me, as evidenced by his comments.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Which is fine. But when in doubt, I'm going to defer to the head coach.

There's a difference between being overly reliant on a guy and needing to involve Jones more, and Adams hurting the offense. If the coaches feel they've neglected to dial up enough targets for Jones, that's probably a good insight. But what is hurting the offense in that case is the failure to use Jones, not the return of Adams.

But it's also clear when you watch the two really terrible offensive performances that Adams is not the problem. He's not even close to the problem. And this idea that his return has caused the bad offensive performances completely ignores what actually happened in those games. It's lazy, sloppy analysis. It's about as accurate as saying that Rodgers must be allergic to California, because the games took place there.

 

[PackAttack12]

There's a difference between being overly reliant on a guy and needing to involve Jones more, and Adams hurting the offense. If the coaches feel they've neglected to dial up enough targets for Jones, that's probably a good insight. But what is hurting the offense in that case is the failure to use Jones, not the return of Adams.

But it's also clear when you watch the two really terrible offensive performances that Adams is not the problem. He's not even close to the problem. And this idea that his return has caused the bad offensive performances completely ignores what actually happened in those games. It's lazy, sloppy analysis. It's about as accurate as saying that Rodgers must be allergic to California, because the games took place there.

I'm not trying to argue any of that. I know he's not the problem, I know that HE is not hurting the offense. Please point out where I've made that assertion. I'm simply saying that the over reliance on him has been a contributing factor to the subpar offensive results. The wording can be changed to fit a certain narrative, but it's a part of the issue that needs to be resolved.

'Adams hurting the offense' and 'the over reliance on Adams is a little high' are two different statements.

We just need to adjust the targets and the scheme a bit. That's all. And I'm sure we will moving forward.

 

[HardRightEdge]

You can call it force feeding, you can call it over reliance, or whatever you want to call it. All I'm saying is, in my opinion, it's been a part of the problem. Not the main problem, not the only problem. The head coach agrees with me, as evidenced by his comments.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Which is fine. But when in doubt, I'm going to defer to the head coach.

Did the coach say they throw the ball to Adams too much? I think I missed that. I think he was talking about the other 68 offensive plays. "We didn't get the ball to Jones enough". OK. When Adams was out, LaFleur used Jones all over the field, wideout, slot, motion...mostly wideout when not in the backfield...with several plays where Jones and Williams were both on the field.

Uh, why not do both, feature both Adams and Jones in the passing game? That's what coach is telling you. H*ll, this roster doesn't even have a slot receiver. While camp is a time for optimism, and the hope that Allison could get the job done, he has in fact looked pretty bad trying to do it.

Adams is the best slot among the wideouts; Jones is actually the 2nd. best WR on this team. There's a lot of configurations LaFleur can mix and match...Jones and MVS wide and Adams out of the slot, or flip Jones and Adams in a more conventional set. Move Jones around for mismatches and getting the defense off-balance.

It's not like any of this would have mattered against the 49ers. It was a matter of getting beat down all over the field, offense and defense.