There are two options, either Rodgers got bad in one year or the Packers have lost enough talent that antiquated route concepts no longer work. Go read the article by Doug Farrar on SI.com that compares the Cardinals and Packers offense. He does a great job of pointing out that the Packers run a lot of route concepts from 40 years ago. Remove the overwhelming talent at QB and WR (something many coaches could win with) and suddenly coaching becomes a big deal.
Really comes down to this, Peyton Manning created job security for mediocre coaching in Indianapolis, I think McCarthy is better than those guys but a great QB can create an illusion that the coaching staff is better than they really are.
Found the article and I couldn't disagree more with Mr. Farrar. Here's a quote from it,
"Yes, the line was a disaster; yes, the receivers are maddeningly inconsistent; and yes, Rodgers needs to play more consistently. But it’s very clear that Green Bay’s primary issue on offense is a series of route concepts that would have been out of date 40 years ago: a series of straight vertical routes with very few combination concepts to create easy openings and almost nothing up the middle to give Rodgers easy reads."
The guy admits everyone on the offense didn't execute and then blames the scheme instead. Maybe the routes are contributing, I'm not qualified to tell, but in no way were they the biggest issue vs Arizona.
He basically says Arizona's offense is better, therefore they have a better scheme. He completely ignores that their offensive line blocks well and the WRs beat one on one match ups consistently without fancy routes.
The Arizona game was a perfect example of Packers players getting beat all over the field, while Arizona won their matchups.
There isn't a coach in the NFL that has a playbook that makes up for the poor execution vs. Arizona.
Doug Farrar needs to spend some time with some NFL coaches if he thinks a coach can just scheme his way to success despite the execution on the field.
