The MLF Effect- GBs Offensive Renaissance

[easyk83]

Here's a great breakdown on our offensive transformation from last year to the present season. Specifically with respect to the change in sacks taken, the reduction of 7 step drops and the move away from a chunk play obsessed approach to something more balanced. In short for the better part of the last decade the Green Bay Packers relied on the supreme singular talent of Aaron Rodgers to extend plays and aggressively push the ball downfield. For a time it yielded tremendous results, 2011, but ultimately defenses adapted.

Starting in 2012 the 49ers and later the Seahawks showed that deep and talented secondaries could line up on our spread iso routes and squat on them. Teams which could rush 4 and drop 7 learned that our Offense would hastily abandon the run and that the ground game could be largely ignored even against 6 man fronts. Defenses would drop their LBs and Safeties, and spread their ends out into the 7 tech and wide 9. You'd see Packer losses where Rodgers would throw it 50 times with pedestrian production, the backs would be averaging nearly 6 ypc but only have 8-13 carries. Despite his tremendous talent we had an offense that was great for producing highlights but tended to struggle with the better defenses in the league and tended to stall in the post season. The Aaron Rodgers Hero Ball Offense, was frankly a phenomenal demonstration of Rodgers' skill set. But in the context of winning super bowls a terrible offense.

MLF has basically brought a championship caliber offensive scheme to Green Bay. Now with Rodgers fully bought into I believe that we are the team to beat in this post season.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[El Guapo]

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[El Guapo]

All fun and finger-cuffs aside, LeFluer brought balance to the offense. He channeled his inner Mr. Miyagi. What all of the rubes calling for a WR didn't realize, is that the McCarthy offense needed another stud WR. The LeFluer offense needed another RB and and versatile blocking TE.

BTW - I saw one of the talking heads on tv this morning, once again beating the tired notion that Rodgers has never had a stud WR from the first round. I find this argument painfully ignorant. While it is true the Packers have never drafted a WR in the first round for Rodgers, he has had a crazy number of stud WRs from Donald Driver to Greg Jennings to Jordy Nelson to Randall Cobb and now Devante Adams. I didn't even toss in James Jones and Jermichael Finley. The first round pick thing is just a meaningless stat. If all the Packers had ever done was give him a bunch of Jeff Janis and Geronimo Allison WRs.....THAT would be a story.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

BTW - I saw one of the talking heads on tv this morning, once again beating the tired notion that Rodgers has never had a stud WR from the first round. I find this argument painfully ignorant. While it is true the Packers have never drafted a WR in the first round for Rodgers, he has had a crazy number of stud WRs from Donald Driver to Greg Jennings to Jordy Nelson to Randall Cobb and now Devante Adams. I didn't even toss in James Jones and Jermichael Finley. The first round pick thing is just a meaningless stat. If all the Packers had ever done was give him a bunch of Jeff Janis and Geronimo Allison WRs.....THAT would be a story.

There's no doubt the Packers currently don't have as much talent at wide receiver as they had early during Rodgers' tenure as the starter. MLF and #12 deserve huge credit to be able to feature an elite offense without it though.

 

[easyk83]

All fun and finger-cuffs aside, LeFluer brought balance to the offense. He channeled his inner Mr. Miyagi. What all of the rubes calling for a WR didn't realize, is that the McCarthy offense needed another stud WR. The LeFluer offense needed another RB and and versatile blocking TE.

BTW - I saw one of the talking heads on tv this morning, once again beating the tired notion that Rodgers has never had a stud WR from the first round. I find this argument painfully ignorant. While it is true the Packers have never drafted a WR in the first round for Rodgers, he has had a crazy number of stud WRs from Donald Driver to Greg Jennings to Jordy Nelson to Randall Cobb and now Devante Adams. I didn't even toss in James Jones and Jermichael Finley. The first round pick thing is just a meaningless stat. If all the Packers had ever done was give him a bunch of Jeff Janis and Geronimo Allison WRs.....THAT would be a story.

If that was all they had ever done Rodgers would have been replaced a long time ago by said ignorant staff/organization. I think that even the suggestion that another stud receiver ignores this offense's struggles in post season play even when it had ample receiving talent, see the 2011 flop against the Giants. That approach lacked the ability to manufacture plays or for that matter manufacture space. Even when you're trotting out Donald Driver Greg Jennings Jordy Nelson James Jones Randall Cobb and Jerimichael Finley. So much talent that one of those guys needed to sit even with an empty backfield. Warning alarms should have gone off after the 2012 season, and definitely should have following the 2013 campaign. We didnt start applying man beater routes until after the 2015 offensive flop, but we still had an offense predicated on chunk plays deep drops and the result was Rodgers getting sacked constantly.

 

[easyk83]

There's no doubt the Packers currently don't have as much talent at wide receiver as they had early during Rodgers' tenure as the starter. MLF and #12 deserve huge credit to be able to feature an elite offense without it though.

But theres a chicken and egg argument. How many receivers would really develop in the offense that we were running from 2011-2018? IMO the current scheme really does put guys in position to succeed by scheming and creating both space and run after the catch opportunities. It also forces defenses to respect the ground game, bunch their defensive fronts and inhibits deep drops from the LBs and safeties. Frequent flares and checkdowns by the backs helps keep LBs out of the intermediate passing lanes.

This scheme is just going to make receivers look better and play better.

 

[easyk83]

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

Yeah I didnt want someone to accuse me of hating on Rodgers and call me an apostate or infidel hence all the superlatives. Although looking back its nuts that Rodgers was as good as he was from a production standpoint as he was in that offense.

 

[Dantés]

LaFleur's system sets Rodgers up to succeed, and Rodgers' talent and brains allows him to execute that system to near perfection. It's a beautiful, symbiotic relationship, and miles ahead of the basic, static, iso crap that we saw under McCarthy for far too long.

 

[PackAttack12]

Watching the Packers offense the past few years felt more like a chore than a hobby or anything that brought real enjoyment. This season, it's been an absolute pleasure watching this offense operate.

 

[XPack]

If all the Packers had ever done was give him a bunch of Jeff Janis and Geronimo Allison WRs

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[tynimiller]

If all the Packers had ever done was give him a bunch of Jeff Janis and Geronimo Allison WRs.....THAT would be a story.

Well, some would say this is precisely what has occurred....LOL

 

[Deleted member 6794]

But theres a chicken and egg argument. How many receivers would really develop in the offense that we were running from 2011-2018?

I highly doubt that McCarthy somehow forgot how to develop wide receivers after winning the Super Bowl.

 

[PikeBadger]

I highly doubt that McCarthy somehow forgot how to develop wide receivers after winning the Super Bowl.

I doubt he ever worked very closely with his WR’s in Green Bay. I would guess his WR coach took that duty. McCarthy was more of a QB coach IMO.

 

[GleefulGary]

I highly doubt that McCarthy somehow forgot how to develop wide receivers after winning the Super Bowl.

I don’t think McCarthy had anything to do with developing WR’s.

I think be the last few years of his tenure, he had a stale, boring, offense that did not help to limit what limitations he had. His offensive identity, in a very brief description, was to try to get his WR’s one on ones and then for them to win that battle. His offense did not scheme people open, it was the NBA version of iso-ball.

He didn’t have the talent he needed to run his offense, but he also wasn’t able to do anything to help his offense out. LaFleur is clearly quite different in that regard.

 

[Dantés]

I don’t think McCarthy had anything to do with developing WR’s.

I think be the last few years of his tenure, he had a stale, boring, offense that did not help to limit what limitations he had. His offensive identity, in a very brief description, was to try to get his WR’s one on ones and then for them to win that battle. His offense did not scheme people open, it was the NBA version of iso-ball.

He didn’t have the talent he needed to run his offense, but he also wasn’t able to do anything to help his offense out. LaFleur is clearly quite different in that regard.

Exactly.

McCarthy's basic philosophy on offense was "be better than the other guys at QB, OL, and WR." Which isn't adding much value.

 

[easyk83]

I highly doubt that McCarthy somehow forgot how to develop wide receivers after winning the Super Bowl.

The current scheme puts much more emphasis on shorter throws and creating separation, its an offense that tends to be more user friendly both for the quarterback and the receiver. This compares favorably to the spread iso scheme that we ran from 11-15 and even once we did start integrating man beater concepts in 16 we were still running an offense overly dependent on downfield chunk plays. Moving back to a true WCO is better for the development of receivers.

 

[GleefulGary]

The current scheme puts much more emphasis on shorter throws and creating separation, its an offense that tends to be more user friendly both for the quarterback and the receiver. This compares favorably to the spread iso scheme that we ran from 11-15 and even once we did start integrating man beater concepts in 16 we were still running an offense overly dependent on downfield chunk plays. Moving back to a true WCO is better for the development of receivers.

This is basically what I said but he said it like an intelligent person, and I said it like a mongoloid.

 

[easyk83]

A good offensive scheme understands that all plays are basically linked and called plays might yield downstream benefits. A team that is too conservative and never challenges defenses downfield invites defenses to squat on the run and shorter routes thus weakening offensive efficiency. A team that obsesses over offensive chunk plays will invite defenses to play with strictly lighter fronts, sell out against downfield passing routes and might even ignore the underneath stuff. Against our offense towards the end of MMs tenure teams were often able to ignore the run game, spread their defensive fronts out and attack Rodgers without consequence. Rodgers, a big part of that disfunction, would ignore the run game and keep throwing often into the teeth of a defense. Consider this game from 2014 against the Bills.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=400554386

Rodgers was picked twice, went 17 of 42 in an utterly putrid performance. Meanwhile Eddie Lacy went for 97 yards on 15 carries with a ypc of 6.5. The Bills were playing us with light fronts all game long, yet Rodgers refused to lean on the run game and insisted on throwing into coverage even with the Bills practically begging us to run. Packers win that game and the NFCG would have been in GB instead of Seattle.

 

[easyk83]

Exactly.

McCarthy's basic philosophy on offense was "be better than the other guys at QB, OL, and WR." Which isn't adding much value.

That and that it doesnt matter if they know what youre doing if you execute better than them.

Opposing DCs: So then its cool if we sellout against what you're showing.

MM: Yes it is. Nothing I love more than to run into stacked boxes and throw into loaded coverages.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I doubt he ever worked very closely with his WR’s in Green Bay. I would guess his WR coach took that duty. McCarthy was more of a QB coach IMO.

I don’t think McCarthy had anything to do with developing WR’s.

There's no doubt McCarthy's offenses struggled late in his tenure with the Packers. But he deserves credit for the success it had during his early years.

For some reason fans aren't capable of admitting that.

 

[PikeBadger]

There's no doubt McCarthy's offenses struggled late in his tenure with the Packers. But he deserves credit for the success it had during his early years.

For some reason fans aren't capable of admitting that.

I’ve made it very clear in the past that I believe McCarthy re-engineered Rodgers into the QB that we’ve seen for the last 13 years. I believe the WR coaches have been more responsible for the technical development of the WR’s. I also credit McCarthy for having all the good position coaches and coordinators on his staff. He must also shoulder the blame for keeping Capers in place too long and for other unsuccessful guys like Ron Zook.

 

[PackinMSP]

I’ve made it very clear in the past that I believe McCarthy re-engineered Rodgers into the QB that we’ve seen for the last 13 years. I believe the WR coaches have been more responsible for the technical development of the WR’s. I also credit McCarthy for having all the good position coaches and coordinators on his staff. He must also shoulder the blame for keeping Capers in place too long and for other unsuccessful guys like Ron Zook.

No question MM helped AR in becoming the accurate and precision passer we see today

 

[Dantés]

There's no doubt McCarthy's offenses struggled late in his tenure with the Packers. But he deserves credit for the success it had during his early years.

For some reason fans aren't capable of admitting that.

Which fans aren't capable of admitting that McCarthy deserves some credit for what he accomplished in Green Bay? All of them? Some of them?

Two things can be true.

1) He did a good job developing Rodgers and his offenses, even if I don't think they're anything special schematically, were good enough to win a SB and for that he's an important part of Packers history.

2) His system as he ran it in Green Bay added very little value, schematically, and basically relied on TT to provide him with great personnel and Rodgers to make him right through sheer brilliance.

It's just much easier for a lot of fans to recognize this now that they're seeing what a vastly more efficient offense can look like. LaFleur is adding a ton more value to the offense this year than McCarthy ever did in any single season.

 

[Pugger]

Watching the Packers offense the past few years felt more like a chore than a hobby or anything that brought real enjoyment. This season, it's been an absolute pleasure watching this offense operate.

Yes. With this QB running this style offense they look like a machine and darn near impossible to stop. Most of the time when the offense stalls it is self-inflicted because a penalty or turnover. When they execute it properly it is a wonder to behold.

 

[Pugger]

The current scheme puts much more emphasis on shorter throws and creating separation, its an offense that tends to be more user friendly both for the quarterback and the receiver. This compares favorably to the spread iso scheme that we ran from 11-15 and even once we did start integrating man beater concepts in 16 we were still running an offense overly dependent on downfield chunk plays. Moving back to a true WCO is better for the development of receivers.

And makes life easier for the OL and other blockers.