Given that the Pack is rarely on TV in my area, I usually end up watching the game at a local bar with Direct TV . . . can't tivo it.

My general impression is that Rodgers has been holding the ball way too long . . . contributing to the sack toals. In the last few games I have found myself yelling at the TV "JUST THOW THE BALL AWAY".

I laughe with someone the other day suggesting that if Brett were still with the team things would be very different. The sack total would be less then half, but the INT total would be about 10 (maybe more)

Has anyone out there been able to review the sacks to determine how many may be Rodgers fault for just holding the ball too long instead of throwing it away?

Rodgers doesn't deserve some of the blame...he deserves almost all of it. It was absolutely maddening watching him jump around back there holding the ball all day. Pathetic. I've never been so disappointed in his performance before.

There were plenty of snaps where the line gave him more than enough time to make something happen, and he still got sacked because he refused to get rid of the ball.

Nothing official, but I have watched every game this year and I would say half are caused by Rodgers holding the ball. I don't know what the coaches grades say, but in your average six sack game this year, there are 1-2 where someone just comes in free or unblocked or bullrushes an OL over, 2-3 where I'm screaming for Rodgers to dump the ball off or throw it away, and the rest are somewhere in between. I believe he took a 6+ second sack yesterday, which is unheard of for a guy with as much experience as he has.

Sack blame. 50% Rodgers, 50% oline.

Rodgers has great potential, unfortunately he is developing some bad habits. The bad thing is many times bad habits will stick with a QB for a longtime.

McCarthy is the coach... so it is his problem to fix.

Only Aaron can correct this. MM could tell him 100x to throw the ball away, but he still won't.

According to Bob McGinn, whose analysis is top notch, it's about 25 percent Aaron, O-line/TE's 75 percent. McCarthy also admitted it appeared Driver and Jennings weren't getting separation/getting open.

I think a the coaching staff needs to help him over come this habit. I though coaches are the ones that shape a good young player into a great player. You really think a player can do that on their own?

Has anyone seen MM yell at Rodgers on the sideline after he makes a bad play?

I haven't missed a game and I do not remember seeing this.

Has he yelled at anyone?

When a team wins and loses it is Never about 1 person. While Rodgers needs to improve is it not nice he is already good and needs to improve? Hell of alot better than being bad and needing to improve.

IMO....I would blame about 12 or 13 of them on Rodgers. The majority are due to the offensive line. Alot of teams are just rushing 4 maybe 5 against us, but they are beating our offensive lineman one on one. I'm still amazed how easily some of the oppposing offensive lineman push our guards and center back. Plus both tackles just can't seem to get a hold of their guy and shove them wide or stone them when they power rush them. This offensive line plays like it has no lead in their pants....only lead in their feet.

Rodgers is just in his second year as a starting quarterback. Enough teams have film on him over time to now game plan accordingly and expose his weaknesses. Favre I believe went through the same thing his second year as starter. He held the ball and did alot of scrambling and threw 24 interceptions. Difference is...Favre would occasionally make the Ohhhh Yeahhh play. I don't see too much of that in Rodgers. Its almost like he is overprogramed and thinking too much. He has to trust what he sees more and just let it go. He should break out of this over time, but I'm afraid this offensive line is going to get him killed by the end of the year and destroy the trust and confidence he must have when he is in the pocket.

Don't forget to assign some blame to the WRs. It's obvious they're not getting open. Occassionally Rodgers does get plenty of time and he's still not finding anyone.

That's not McCarthy's style. The be-phlegmatic-in-public style has worked for plenty of successful coaches — Dungy, Tomlin, Walsh …. Coaches should just be themselves; that's how to earn respect. That and not calling a draw play on 3rd-&-13.

Rodgers deserves credit for being willing to take a sack -- he plays as if his line is going to give him the time he needs.

I'd rather have this than to see him throwing the ball away rather than trying to make the play.

I would love to know how often Rodgers audibles. I know on some plays, he has the option to call pass or run. But does it go beyond that? Does he have the ability within the offense to audible to a completely different play?

This has become a huge part of the NFL game. Some plays are doomed from the start if the defense is set-up a certain way. I really want to believe Rodgers has some control at least to audible into a play that has a better chance of success.

I do think this offense has gotten away from quick throws to the WR at the snap, screens, RB/FB in the flat, short pass to TE in zone covg...lots of options for high precentage passes that I don't see them taking advantage of.

What I find strange is that Rodgers didn't hold on the bal last year (as a 1st yr starter.)

Is the problem with Rodgers holding the ball too long more on the receivers, because we have less receivers running routes? In other words, because of the OL are the tight ends and running backs not going out for the check downs because they are staying in to help block. I haven't been able to watch all of the games (we don't get all of the games where I live) so I haven't had to see every game. There are times I will see Grant in the backfield attempting to pass block (and I say that loosely) and the other team is only rushing 5 guys. That means the defense has 6 guys to cover our 3 to 4 receivers.

so I haven't had to see every game.


Now that is a sad, but probably appropriate commentary on the present state of our favorite team.

This is a good point, and in my opinion half the blame for sacks goes to play calling. This offense has gotten so one-dimensional and predictable that every opposing team knows exactly what the Packers are going to do.

When it's 3rd and 4 and you go empty backfield, it pretty much tells the defensive they only have one play to defense, especially with McCarthy/Rodgers going away from the short slants. All defenses need to do now is rush the passer and bring in extra DBs to cover the long ball. You can see that in the rare occasion when Rodgers runs with the ball, the entire middle of the field is wide open.

What ever happen to the shovel pass that Favre used so effectively? What ever happened to the reverse? What ever happened to the play-action? What ever happened to the screen pass? What ever happened to the short pass to the RB, FB or TE?

Make defenses guess a little bit and I bet the sacks go down dramatically.

Sometimes players just need to get out of bad habits by themselves.

I'd say that Rodgers is holding the ball too long on occasion (but not always). He's a second-year starter behind a terrible line, so I'm going to cut him some slack. I'd also note that yesterday was his first really horrible performance this year. The other games he has played good to great.

I also have to recall seeing a young Brett Favre and the Packers play a preseason game at Camp Randall in the mid-90's. Favre's biggest ovation came when he threw a pass out-of-bounds rather than throw another bone-headed interception (which he did a lot in his first few years if you recall - actually he did it a lot in his last few years too. :-0) So one has to accept a few growing pains in a young QB.

The best thing you can give a young QB is a healthy line and a good running game. Rodgers has neither.

Well maybe... but it will be a tall order with this teams offensive play calling and offensive line.

Sometimes the coach needs to take off the kid-gloves and pull the player making the mistake out of the game for a series or so to give some real-time coaching.

Aaron has been responsible for 50% in my opinion. I have watched all of the games on DVR as I only get about 50% of them locally. The receivers not being open is not an excuse, he can throw the ball away or run.

It seems like Aaron is trying too hard to avoid being Brett and taking chances. His QB rating is great because sacks are not factored into it.

I'd like to see MM send in Flynn next time Aaron pulls a 7 second dance ending with a sack. Let Aaron stand next to MM and watch the sequencing live from the sidelines for 3 or 4 plays and then send him back in. If Flynn does really well...it would not be all bad.

I'd be amazed if McCarthy had the balls for that, no matter how desperate he is. Hell, if he were the kind of man who had the balls for it, the team probably wouldn't be in the shape it's in to begin with.

I don't see why people think benching would work. What happens if Flynn comes out, gets pressured, and throws a pick? What kind of message does that send?

Benching implies that AR would come out for the game. This is exactly the type of thing that happens with players at almost every other position. It even happens to some other QBs. It is one thing to give the benefit of the doubt to a QB with a lot of skins on the wall. AR has some stats, but nothing else. His ego should be able to handle some real-time coaching.

What if Flynn throws a pick? At least he was trying to make something happen. I think AR has been too affected by the criticisms of BF with regard to protecting the ball. The pendulum has swung from a bit too reckless to a bit too cautious.

I'd rather be too cautious than too reckless. Taking a sack and punting away is a hell of a lot better than throwing an INT, IMO.

Pulling AR out is High School stuff. Especially for the sin of holding the ball too long. Now if he threw 5 INTs in a game....that's another story. I remember people saying favre should be pulled from games. And he was capable of having some really awful games years ago. Holmgren never pulled him. Wanna tell me Holmgren doesn't have balls either?

In the NFL, every set of downs is important. Pulling AR does nothing but interupt the flo of the game, and ptentially cost a 1st down/ scoring drive. It's a fine line between holding the ball too long and making a huge play. Mnay of the biggest plays you'll see on "any given Sunday" is when the QB waits that split second longer for the WR to break open.

I recommend posters check out a site called Pro Football Focus (do a google search). It's an excellent site that grades every player on every play of every game. Obviously, grading is a subjective thing, but it's not so hard to figure out if a guy "wins" on a play or "loses". I looked at PFF specifically in reference to how many sacks are to blame on OL, TE, RB versus Rodgers.

I posted in another thread how the meme is getting out of hand that Rodgers is mostly to blame. Using PFF's analysis, Rodgers was responsible for 7 sacks through the Tampa Bay game. Now, you could argue how accurate that number is, but I doubt it would vary much more than +/- 2 sacks. The OL, TE's and RB's are responsible for the rest based on their blocking. I won't do a breakdown, but needless to say, Colledge and Barbre are big offenders.

What is very interesting is to look at how the individual OL are graded. What we've seen each week is fairly accurately represented in their grades. Barbre was horrible. Wells is just average. Colledge stunk at LT. What is interesting is that Sitton has been a bright spot. Colledge as a LG has not been that great. Cliffy has not been that good either.

Also, as a very side note, Rodgers had the highest grade of all QB's through Week 9. Not saying it's accurate, but just found that interesting.

Others have taken a stab at figuring out who's to balme for each sack. All of this research is very interesting, but can never tell the whole story. Some sacks are no brainers. Someone busts through Colledge and sacks AR before he even completes his drop.

However, sometimes it's muliple reasons. Blown blocking assignments where player "x" gets the sack assigned to him, but maybe that's because he was trying to cover up for someone else. Or was never told by Wells to make a blocking assignment adjustment.

Finally, there are sacks where technically Rodgers isn't to blame, but did have the opportunity to side-step the rusher and/or get rid of the ball. Those are sacks you can't "blame" him for, but could have been avoided nevertheless.

You can only adjust playing style so quickly, especially at QB.

No QB is going to change their habits overnight, because so much of the position relies on instinct and reflex built up over years and years of playing. Rodgers is holding the ball because he thinks he can make the play (and a lot of times he's correct). You can't just say "throw the ball faster" like he was a player in Madden.

As for benching him or whatever, that's ridiculous -- you don't put your best QB on the bench during a game at this level. That aside, does anyone honestly think that Rodgers somehow doesn't mind taking those hits? I'm pretty sure each one serves as better reinforcement than a down on the bench would.

What if Flynn throws a pick? At least he was trying to make something happen. I think AR has been too affected by the criticisms of BF with regard to protecting the ball. The pendulum has swung from a bit too reckless to a bit too cautious.


Couldn't the lame logic be applied to rodgers holding on to the ball? he's waiting for people to get open and trying to make something happen with his feet?

I am assuming from your post that you are not playing devil's advocate (correct me if I'm wrong).

Benching QB's happens when QB's are playing horribly. See Donovan McNabb's comments about coming in and out the game when Reid tries to get gimmicky with Vick and the Wildcat. He doesn't like how it interrupts the flow and getting the feel for the game.

But my post really is about your second paragraph and the bolded sentence. This is very Favre-esque thinking. An interception is a worse result than a sack. Assuming Aaron holds onto the ball when being sacked, the offense lives for another play on the series (if it's not third down). Turning the ball over kills that chance and is a momentum changer.

I would agree 100% if the Sack-INT ratio were a 1:1.

Losing yardage 100% of the time is a much worse proposition to me than an occasional INT mixed with frequent catches and many incomplete passes.

Sacks also have a high probability of fumbles, which are often worse (field position-wise) than an INT.

The big difference is that sacks and fumbles do not show up on passer ratings, giving the impression that a QB is performing much better than reality.

I don't think this is an either/or situation. One can throw away the ball out of bounds or at the feet of a receiver and have neither INTs nor Sacks. AR did a little better against Dallas. He got rid of a few, but with his physical talent he should be running or throwing not getting sacked outside the pocket.

But obviously he isn't "losing yardage 100% of the time". He's being sacked 4-5 times per game -- all the other times he's getting the throw off or scrambling for yards.

You can't just draw an easy clean division between the two, because there's a very fine line between a great play made and a sack taken.

What Mike McCarthy and many are trying to teach Aaron Rodgers is that it is NOT an EITHER/OR proposition.

Some times not putting the ball up is the right choice, but often the correct thing to do then is to zing the ball out of bounce beyond the line of scrimmage and live to fight another day.

By too often taking the sack the offense not only loses rhythm, it also loses ground in the very important field position game.

Aaron Rodgers is a great young QB - but playing faster and making quicker decisions is still on his learning curve as a 2nd year starter.

That's a very good thought Bruce, but these days, anything negative towards AR is jumped on by fans here and defended to the death like he has no involvement or he has no room for improvement. Post-Favre saga, anything negative towards AR is taken as treasonous. The fact remains that he has work to do to get better and so does the line.

Sorry, using my figures, it is 100%. Here is why.... The only plays in question are those in which AR took a sack after having or creating enough time to either make a completion, run for a gain, or throw the ball away. Since we know that in reality he did take a sack on those occasions, it is axiomatic that 100% of his sacks were losses in yardage.

What I am saying is that I would rather see this:

Out of 15 such opportunities (rough estimate) I would like to have seen him run on 5, throw it away on 5 and take a chance on 5. It seems that Aaron is always looking WAY down field in these situations and does not see the value of taking a small gain.

Of the 5 chances, most are likely to be incomplete but for argument's sake I grant you one INT and you grant me one 1st down.

So. My way you get 1 drive killing INT, 8 incomplete passes, 5 rushing gains and 1 1st down.

Aaron's way gets you 15 drive killing sacks (remember, GB has only scored 1 time this season on a drive where he was sacked). Figures each sack is 5-10 yards so 75-150 yards of negative offense.

I guess I am willing to risk the INT for the gain.