I know for some it is serious sacrilege to be at all critical of Aaron Rodgers, so for that reason I will state the positives and factors Rodgers had no control over from the Bears game before naming the areas he struggled.

• 1st and foremost, Aaron did not turn the ball over - which was huge given the Bears were throwing stuff at him he had not seen before.
• 2nd, Aaron put 5 passes (by my count) in the hands of receivers that should have been caught - two by Driver and two by Nelson. Donald and Jordy are paid to make those catches and they need to guard against lapses like that in Big games like the one last Sunday night. If those catches are made, it looks like a very different game.
• 3rd, He could not control some bogus and other iffy calls that stifled the offense. Clifton never moved, and the mystery false start was another driver killer. Spitz's supposed hold was more of a pancake block and was thrown because when the player went to the ground the official assumed a hold. Sitton's hold was iffy. he did not hold on, he simply reached and attempted to slow the moment of the DT - I can see the call, but not in the context of the large number of blatant holds that were not being called upon the Bears including one play where Aaron Kampman was tackled by the facemask as Cutler rolled away from him. All of those calls negated positive plays and contributed to an offense that was out of rhythm all night long.
• 4th Aaron was getting hit a lot. A good part of that was on the offensive line and/or play calling - though Rodgers (by his own admission) contributed to the problem (more to follow).

This week Rodgers will face a very solid secondary that does not give up TD's easily and save for the fluke play last week guards against the big play very well. What follows are the things he will need to do to improve his play and lead this offense to better rhythm and more success against Cincinnati:

1. Aaron needs to read the defenses faster and recognize disguised coverage's better - the Bears had him hesitating and confused much of Sunday night.
   
2. Aaron needs to hit open receivers. Early in the game he had receivers open deep only to over or under throw them several times - allowing the Bears to continue to gamble and cheat in coverage and pass rushing. He hits even one of those receivers and it changes the course of that game.
   
3. Aaron needs to get rid of the ball quicker. Yes there was serious pressure on him, but he cannot hold on to the ball and his play on the safety was beyond poor.
   
4. Aaron needs to audible out of bad matchups - and set the rhythm much more by either waiting for the proper read or hurrying the team team before the defense can adjust(depending upon the circumstances) at the line of scrimmage.

Do not get me wrong, I think Aaron Rodgers is the franchise QB of the Green Bay Packers and one of the best young quarterbacks in the game right now. I would not trade Rodgers for Cutler even if the Bears threw in a 1st and a 2nd round draft pick - which should tell you how positive I am on Rodgers.

But with that high praise goes high expectations. Rodgers is the leader of this offense. He needs to take charge, recognize things quicker, get them out of bad plays on the line of scrimmage and do his part to assure the offense gets into and keeps its rhythm. It would be at great peril to underestimate a fine Cincinnati team (especially defensively), and Rodgers needs to do his part to assure that does not happen. One way Aaron can accomplish this is by stepping up his game at Lambeau on Sunday.

I thought Rodgers had a perfectly solid game against 'da Bears.

The numbers don't look as good as one would like but, as you rightly pointed out, this was a result of (1) his receivers dropping key passes that should have been completions and (2) having to run for his life all night.

Also, on the safety, there was basically nothing he could have done. If you watch the play again, you'll notice:

1. The rusher was on him before the play had developed, so there wasn't anyone he could throw to.
2. The rusher was on him before he'd left the tackles box, so he couldn't throw the ball away without incurring an intentional grounding call that would have resulted in a safety anyhow.
3. The rusher did a great job of getting his hands on the ball, trying to knock it out. This forced Rodgers to hold the ball.

This effectively left Rodgers with two possible responses:

• Throw the ball at the feet of a receiver early in the play. The risk of this, especially given how crowded that portion of the field was at the time, is the potential for an INT that would have been walked in for an easy TD.
• Try to evade the rush. This is what he did and it didn't work out.

It was a bad situation, but given how it worked out he probably did the smartest thing.

Anyhow, I'm not suggesting there isn't room for improvement -- there's always room for improvement -- but given everything else we saw last week I never once thought "gee, Rodgers needs to step it up".

Rodgers does need to step it up because he is the leader of this offense and it is an offense that underperformed.

More later.

By all accounts, Rodgers took a group of guys on his offensive line who had been getting whupped on all night and who were obviously in the mindset that they were gonna get beat on their blocks and got them to pull it together in just the right moment -- that's solid football leadership right there.

Again, what I'm saying is that Rodgers didn't strike me as being the problem last week. From where I was sitting, he did everything you want a quarterback to do -- he was accurate, he made smart plays and he dealt with adversity to win the game. Maybe you saw something I did not.

Great post Bruce, my thoughts exactly.

Rodgers did a lot of good things on Sunday, but he is better than he performed and needs to up his game.

I expect more of him, and he expects more of himself.

I think the areas you identified, both what he did and did not do well, are spot on.

Say what?

Rodgers played a solid game, but we expect more than "solid" from our quarterbacks around here. Rodgers still needs to improve his reads and reactions. Yeah, he's not to blame for the offensive problems we had, but he is able to compensate for some of them. And he should.

I agree and so does Rodgers. If you watched his interviews since the game he says almost the same things that Bruce says.

Just because he played well in the pre-season and is a very good QB, doesn't mean that he doesn't have room to learn and grow.

I am hoping that MM puts him in a position to be successful with the right play-calls. The OL needs to give him more time to do his reads and I agree with the other thing Bruce said, Aaron has to hurry up getting off the line of scrimmage. I wouldn't mind seeing them do a little no huddle just to speed up the tempo and not let the defense get set.

Not trying to be smart or reactive but perhaps Aaron saw something you didn't"

“Personally I was a little bit off. I missed some throws I definitely feel like I should’ve made. We really didn’t until the last drive when we had to."

“We had some breakdowns, I’m definitely a part of that in the protection scheme and we need to do a better job of that. We had a preseason where I wasn’t getting touched too much and that’s not always reality when the real games start. The speed increases, the games are more complex and we need to do a better job of adjusting.”

Aaron on the Bengals' defense:

“They’re multiple in their schemes and coverages. I think both the corners are playing very well. They’re a fast flow defense and making tackles all over the place. It’s going to be important for us to be in more manageable situations so they can’t run those extensive packages and sit back and tee off on us.”

For the record last week they kept the Broncos from reaching the red zone and to converging only 3 of 12 on third downs. The Bengals defense also force three-and-outs on half of the drives they faced.

Like I said, the Bengals should not be taken lightly - especially given their heart-breaking defeat snatched from the jaws of victory fluck against the Broncos.

I agree Bruce nice job.

I wasn't unhappy with Rodgers' play Sunday night. It isn't easy to get into any sort of rhythm when you are running for your life all night long. Had he been careless with the ball like his counterpart on the bares I'd be unhappy.

Id like to give it more then one game.

What Rodgers needs to do is win. At the end of the day, it is what will measure any QB. even those with less talent. You win, you are in.

No doubt. I want to see Aaron get some of that Brady attitude - step up, kick ass and take names!

Rodgers did not have a great game, but............................................. he did not make any grievous mistakes and the worst was the safety. No Ints, no fumbles. Some poor decisions on his part... I guess. His reliable WRs dropped a couple, especially early. He was getting hit..... Funny any QB back there that is getting hits on him tend to be a bit more too quick and a bit jittery (maybe not the correct word... maybe happy feet).

He lead his team back from a 4th Q deficit for the 1st time (????) and showed a lot of toughness. GB WON!!! Maybe last year, they lose.. But this year GB is 1-0 and Rodgers was a big part of the victory.

I am on record saying the Rodgers must take his game to the next level and beyond to really be considered an elite and maybe fans will stop trying to remind him and us of the last QB for GB. I believe he can be a top 3 QB this year. He just has to show it. Chicago has a very good D and it was the 1st game of the season. Not that this influenced Rodgers (well, the D did), but the team is still trying to get together offensively. In the preseaon, maybe it was too easy.

Two more tune up games that are winnable and GB should be able to make yards and TDs against before the Monday night game!

Isn't that the truth. He got more props from a lot of people for that game ,where he really didn't play one of this better games, than he did last year when he played great for 58 minutes and they lost in the end. He got a glimpse into Ben Roethlisberger's world. When you've got an elite D behind you to keep the score close, as long as you're heroic in the end, that's what people will remember. Kind of silly, but that's the way it works a lot of the time.

Of course we Packers fans tend to be a more cerebral bunch and can look a little deeper at these situations, and I agree with Bruce that he could have played better on the whole.

Exactly! I agree that it is all about winning.

This is not a backward looking critique, rather a forward looking call to step up his game.

Aaron played well enough to win last Sunday, if he hopes to win again on Sunday and to be leading this team on an upward trend to where they aspire to go he will NEED TO STEP UP HIS GAME.

I started by naming his not turning the ball over and the things he could not control, but it is hard to imagine him or his coaching staff not seeing plenty of room for stepping up and improving his play from week one to week two.

There is always room for improvement on any team with any player. I just think its a little premature. He played well enough for us to win the game with help from all facets of the team.

Good enough for me.

In light of the 4 positives Bruce posted I agree completely.

Bruce - CIN is nowhere near the DEF that CHI is and they did not have months to scheme for Rodgers.

The OLine and the WRs need to step up their games, not the QB.

Jim there is no not in the equation. Yes indeed the offensive line and the WR need to step up their games -- that is quite obvious and has been extensively covered by everyone including me.

Lost in the conversation has been that Aaron Rodgers (2nd year starter and leader of this offense) did not play up to the standards that the coaching staff has set for him or of his expectations of himself - see his many comments on the topic including those I provide on the previous page.

Just as Chicago prepared for Rodgers, Rodgers prepared for Chicago. Both teams will be preparing on the normal week schedule for this game.

Of course the Packers are favored at home (as they should be), but the Bengals have a better defense than you seem to want to give them credit for.

I just watched NFL Network do a little film work on the Chicago game and when they ran the film, I saw something interesting

On one of the plays where O-Gun was "beating" Barbre, all Rodgers had to do was ...step up...into a clear lane and Barbre would have been able to ride O-Gun harmlessy past.

They all got punched hard and fast by the Chicago D, a perfect wake up to let them know its for real now

I expect a better outing for the entire offense this week, regardless of Cincy's talent

And the Bears have a better defense than you seem to be giving them credit for. They disrupted the OLine and the WR, not giving Rodgers time or options.

I have some disagreement with the perspective in this thread. It's not a question of disagreeing so much as just the frames of reference we use when evaluating. All things must be seen in context. So essentially, I think skyshadow has a point - it's perspective might be a bit rosy, granted, but contextually I think it's more reasonable than singling out one of the finer offensive players.

It's not that Rodgers can't improve. Of course he can. And must. He has to be striving continually to get better, to learn more, to just simply improve. Like HeavyD said, he needs to grow to take his game to the next level. And hopefully, with his attitude, that's exactly what will happen.

At the same time, suggesting that someone needs to "step up their performance" implies that they lagged somehow in ways that should not have happened, specifically on an individual level. Had the rest of the offense been firing on all cylinders, I would not only agree, but I'd think it was an understatement. But that wasn't the case.

For whatever reasons - moot to this point - the entire offense was off that day. Rodgers no more than any other - indeed, probably less. When the whole battalion finds itself marching through quicksand, there's little point or relevance to calling out one man and saying he should step it up. The entire group knows they need to step it up, if that's the way to look at it, but at the individual level, context must be taken into account. No one is sane in an insane asylum.

In a sense, to say he needs to step it up is about as meaningful as saying to every man woman and child everywhere, at every moment of every day, "you need to step it up". Of course, that doesn't mean it's not so - it's just that it's a bit bemusing to make a point of saying it. To say it to one man in a group that is to a man falling short implies that the one man is not carrying his load - true enough, again, but hardly entirely fair.

There's an old engineer's maxim (say, e.g., while building bridges in a jungle): It's hard to think of deadlines when you're up to your arse in alligators.

As for what he says about himself in a press conference, I don't care a fig. It's less than meaningless. It's just PR. It is not, imo, a supporting argument.

It's like Lyndon Johnson once said, If I was walking on water, they'd complain that I can't swim!

(Ok, that's not what he said, but it's what he meant. The actual quote was, "If one morning I walked on top of the water across the Potomac River, the headline that afternoon would read: 'President Can't Swim.'")

Meanwhile, all I can add to that is that Rodgers had better step it up against the Bengals!

I give the Bears plenty of credit for their defense. Lovie has them playing well and last Sunday nnight they executed a great game plan with intensity.

Where or when did I disrespect the Bears defense?

I also have not disrespected Aaron Rodgers in this thread. As I said I think he is a franchise QB and one of the finest young QB's in the game.

The fact remains that not only did Tony Romo (140.6), Drew Brees (137.0), Tom Brady (97.8) and Peyton Manning (94.3) outperform Rodgers (at least statistically), so did...

Brodie Croyle KC (116.1), Trent Edwards BUF (114.1) Kyle Orton DEN, Matt Ryan ATL Tom Brady NE, Matt Hasselbeck SEA, Joe Flacco, Brett Favre MIN, Jason Campbell WAS, Eli Manning NYG

In the end the Win is what matters, and it is time to move on to this week's game but if you look at Rodgers play and think he played up his potential and can not see the mistakes he made that he can easily improve upon then it seems to me you are not really looking.

Terry, the QB is singled out by the nature of the position. That is magnified when the QB is so clearly the leader of the offense like Rodgers is in Green Bay.

At no time did I remove the context - read the original post where I go out of the way to name the context including where Rodgers performed well and things he had little or no control of (like dropped passes).

I am operating under the assumption that this is a football discussion board and a MM, TT, MM and Aaron Rodgers subforum. If it is simply a cheerleading subforum , my bad, let me revise my posts to say:

"Gee isn't that Aaron Rodgers swell, he played great and looked great doing it. He is the best, perfect in nearly every way. I am confident that he will lead us to an undefeated season..."

Thanks for the good giggle this morning Terry! I've heard these before but it was fun to see them again.

I agree with Bruce. I've said that already, but perhaps I should clarify why a little more.

There is no doubt that other factors, those outside Rodgers' control, affected his play: for example, receivers dropped balls, Barbre was abused and gave up a few sacks, and the offensive line was called for some questionable holding calls, thus putting the offense in unfavorable down and distances. That all said, Rodgers could have done a better job of making his calls at the line of scrimmage, and he was inaccurate on some of his throws, including ones where he had ample time to throw.

As some of you say, Rodgers did enough to win, and for people like Lare, that's all that matters. But the Packers were fortunate to escape with a win, and similar performances in the future won't always yield the same results. In other words, just because the Packers won doesn't mean we should be content with Rodgers' (or other players') performance. I'm sure the coaches and Rodgers aren't. Because in the end, despite how well the defense is playing, the offense is this team's bread and butter: if the Packers are going to make any noise this year (in the positive sense), the offense needs to play much better than they did on Sunday night, Rodgers included. This is Bruce's point; everyone needs to be accountable. Barbre rightfully has received his share of criticism. The receivers have, too, for their unacceptable dropped passes. Rodgers is worthy of some criticism as well.

Rodgers is a great player, but one of the main reasons I like him so much is his humble nature, his willingness to acknowledge when he plays well but also to acknowledge when he doesn't play so well. It keeps him in check, and it keeps him hungry to improve. So in the end, I'm not worried about whether he'll step up his game because I truly believe he will. Until he does, however, we have every right to sit here and note the areas in which he needs improvement.

In sum, Bruce isn't saying anything Rodgers himself wouldn't admit.

Thoughts:
1. Rodgers is politically correct and as a good QB/leader will try to take responsibility for non-success. He's never going to point the finger at the o-line, even if they are failing big-time. Point being that some self-critical press comments don't really reflect on how well he did or didn't play.

2. He certainly missed some passes. Top QB's do make good passes even while pressured. Would he likely have thrown more accurately given decent protection? Sure. But he just missed some guys who were open, and if he's only going to excel when he gets great protection, he's not likely that he'll ever excel consistently for the packers. And one or two of those screen plays looked like it could have worked if he'd thrown it decent.

3. Nobody is perfect, so one can always rightfully advocate for improvement. (And last week, Rodgers was far from perfect, even if again he was less distant from perfect than were either his o-line or his receivers or certainly Cutler.)

4. There was at least one play where he was on the run and he made a difficult throw that Driver didn't catch, when James Jones was about 20 yards clear. Again, hard to read everything when you're scrambling for your life. But great QB's sometimes do see stuff even when the extreme pressure is on.

5. We praise for not throwing picks, we criticize for holding the ball too long and not reading quickly enough. Quick read guys (ala Favre) are often seeing the trajectory of a play and making a throw projecting that a guy will be open, often before he's actually gotten that wide open. And don't-hold-the-ball-too-long guys (like Favre) don't need to hold the ball that long because they don't wait for the opening to be enormous. Favre threw into slender windows sometimes, so he didn't need to wait that long to find at least some receiver who was somewhat open. But picks routinely come when guys throw into somewhat narrow windows, but don't deliver it perfectly. Accurate throw, completion; inaccurate throw, possible pick. Or when receivers (and defenders) don't go where QB projects they will go. The QB throws the ball because he expects that while the ball is in flight, the receiver will get more open and move to the ball; but it doesn't always work that way, especially if the receivers break off routes.

I guess what I'm suggesting is that we probably can't have it both ways with Rodgers. If we want low-risk low-pick Rodgers, he's going to have to hold the ball longer because there won't always be a receiver wide open right away. If we want don't-hold-the-ball-so-long Rodgers, we're going to need him to often make throws into smaller windows to receivers who aren't yet as wide open as we'd like, and in so doing there will be increased pick risk.

Every QB has to come to some such compromise. Favre often got criticized for gambling too much. Perhaps Rodgers to a small degree needs to let it rip a little earlier and gamble a little more?

6. Another spin: if Lee and Finley are constantly staying back to help Barbre, it's going to be harder to find somebody open quickly than if Jones or Finley or Lee were going out to provide targets and to absorb defenders.

This goes double for the week leading up to St Louis.

Rodgers is a great young QB, but he needs to step it up and lead by example.

Hard to do that when you are on your back most of the game.

Yeah, it's hard to comment on anything about Rodgers from last week aside from his ability to bounce back from a hit.

Yes it is!

OF course the answer is to stay off your back.

There are things Aaron could be doing to help with this including: better presnap reads, audibles, quick counts and throwing the ball away when in trouble.

ONe thing I love about young Mr Rodgers is he does not avoid responsibility (unlike many of his fans who what to shield him from any type).

I was a good football player, I certainly never looked to our team's weakest links to suddenly change and become the strength of our team. Instead I worked to step up my game and bring them along on the wave the I and other leaders on the team would create from our improved play.

Any team that reduced itself to pointing fingers, especially at its youngest and least developed players showed a vulnerability I was always thrilled to see and exploit.

He does need to step his game up...along with about 20 other guys.

Yup!!!!

Can I look forward to a thread on the other 20?

Bruce I agree with that but ultimately the Oline is the weak link on this team and has been for a couple years now. Favre in 07 was good enough to mask it. Aaron isnt there yet. If the finger should be pointed in any direction its at Ted Thompson.

Just like that other QB that would get consistent criticism here for every lose.

He is the QB and should take some blame for the lose, it is is difficult to say how much blame he deserves considering how bad the whole offense played.

Does Rodgers lead the league in both sacks taken and passes that have been dropped?

Not jus tsacks but number of 'knockdowns" 19 and did not hit that number till games 5 or 6 last year.

I don't think there is a shortage.

As I said in my 2 of 16 thread today - criticizing the play of the players in this last game is like "shooting fish in a barrel."

There are also things he could be doing to hinder, including everything Jay Cutler did in week one.

I don't think Rodgers can escape all criticism, and neither can McCarthy, but it sure feels like the line was the culprit. Daryn Colledge's technique was even worse than Barbre's last week. It's almost impossible for an NFL-quality linemen to get beat by the same move three times in a half of football. Rodgers wound up doing his Roethlisberger impersonation: denying the awfulness of his line in order to maintain his composure. It didn't quite work.

Tom Pelissero's take is more forgiving of Rodgers:



(my emphasis)

I think those early drops got the offense and especially Rodgers out of his rhythm. Make those catches and maybe the offense and Rodgers have more confidence and more importantly the Bengals concentrate on taking away the longer passes, which would have opened up the shorter pass game and maybe the run.

I could just feel the momentum shift on those drops, especially when playing at home. Add the fact that MM doesn't do the best of job adjusting his offense during the game, and the wheels came off the offense by the second quarter.

Rodgers isn't close to being the problem. He hasn't played very well, but who would with that offensive line? Some heads better start to roll out the door if this is a continous problem during the season. They need to protect the FRANCHISE, which is Rodgers.

While I certainly agree that Rodgers is the franchise QB - he is not the franchise.

Further, champions look to their best players to lead and perform. While Aaron is certainly not even close to the biggest problem, he is the highest paid player in the position of leadership.

He does not need excuses. Rodgers is not playing fast enough at multiple levels - if guys cannot see that they either don't understand the position or are blinded by their allegiance.

This is not to excuse the substandard pass blocking nor the drops nor the poor play calling.

Turning this offense around starts with its best player picking up his game - plain and simple.

Peyton Manning would look human behind this line. Tom Brady would be in the hospital.

I don't really think its a case of Rodgers holding onto the ball. We have 7 guys protecting fewer defenders and allowing guys to get pressure on Rodgers. Nobody is open when that happens. When the defense can get pressure with fewer guys than we have blocking, bad things are going to happen. Like others have said, Rodgers could be playing much worse. He could be tossing the ball up for grabs like some QBs do. He is doing what he can with the plays being called and the OL that he is behind.

Apparently Rodgers feels the same way I do. Like I said in the previous post, McCarthy is calling max protection plays and guys are still getting to the QB. Rodgers feels that even if he had less protection he would prefer if he had more guys out there running routes. Thus he wants McCarthy to back off of the max protection. He thinks its doing more harm than good. When you have more guys blocking than rushers guys simply aren't going to be open. Everybody says Rodgers is holding onto the ball too long. What is he supposed to do when 5 guys are beating 7? There isn't anybody open.

Rodgers stated this today in an interview with the Green Bay Press Gazette. He wants less protection but with more options to pass to. Its time for McCarthy to trust Rodgers more. He really shouldn't worry. Rodgers statistically is among the best QBs at making the defense pay for blitzing. He has a 100+ QB Rating against the blitz. Sometimes I wonder if McCarthy even knows the strength of his team anymore. Let them send blitzers but leave favorable matchups for Rodgers to exploit. I really don't know what McCarthy is doing anymore.

Very interesting and a great post.

Just a follow up LINK to what was mentioned in your post.

Well, quite aside from the sarcasm, Bruce, it became obvious Sunday that I was entirely mistaken anyway. Very wrong indeed.

So, I have to go back to the drawing board and shut up and you seem to be completely vindicated.