The Dude Meets the Dirty Birds

Our neighbor Suzanne, in a completely unrelated context, recently said that nothing we do is random.  When I saw the photo of Aaron Rodgers wearing The Dude's sweater from The Big Lebowski, I thought the same thing.  Rodgers didn't just happen to pull that sweater out of his closet because it was a little chilly Thursday night.

Rodgers is a fan of the cult classic, The Big Lebowski, as disclosed in the radio show he used to have with Jason Wilde of ESPN.  So if this was no accident, what was he trying to tell us?  I interpret it as this year's version of "R-E-L-A-X."  Packer-focused media, even including obscure blogs like this one, have been obsessed with the question, "what is wrong with Aaron Rodgers?"  If The Dude abides, as the catch-phrase from the movie states, then Rodgers is telling us that he, too, abides, meaning he lives in his State of Dudeness, unbothered by all the slings and arrows hurled at him by his critics.

At any rate, despite a slow start in the first half, with the Packers moving the ball but not scoring enough points, Rodgers ended up completing 39 passes of 56 attempts, with 3 touchdowns and no interceptions, and the Packers beat the Bears 26-10.  And it could have been much worse for the Bears.  Rodgers could easily have had 5 touchdowns, since Cobb had a TD in his hands on the first drive until the ball was knocked out of his hands, and had another in his hands at the end of the half, but could not quite get the second foot inbounds.  And of course this was despite the absence of a single running back on the roster with any game experience with the Packers.

But still, all is not right with Rodgers and Thursday's game doesn't really change that.  As Heath Evans said on NFL Network, his pass placement is still bad at times.  And he is still missing more passes than he should.  Just take Rodgers' TDs to Davante Adams.  On the first one, the ball should have been placed outside, and instead it went inside.  Only Adams' extraordinary catch through the defensive back's arm saved the TD.  On the second TD, there was a defensive screw-up and nobody was within 5 yards of Adams.  But Rodgers threw a pass that required Adams to make a diving, rolling catch to make.  Despite this, Rodgers still looked sharper on Thursday night than he has all year, with the possible exception of the first half of the Lions game.  I realize that it was "only" against the Bears, and that the Bears are a pretty bad team right now.  Still, this is where the Packers are right now, and I can only hope that they continue to improve.

With the long home stand over, the Packers now head to Atlanta to meet the on-again, off-again Falcons.  Everybody knows that Atlanta was the site of what was probably Rodgers' best game ever, when he torched the no. 1 seed Falcons in the 2010 playoffs on the way to winning Super Bowl XLV.  The last time they met (in Green Bay in 2014), the Packers barely staved off a furious comeback by the Falcons to preserve the win.  The Packers led 31-7 at the half, but after a furious and record-setting onslaught by Julio Jones, they were lucky to end up winning, 43-37.  And anyone who saw it will never forget the final Packers game ever at Milwaukee County Stadium in 1994, when Favre ignored his coach's orders and decided to dive for what turned out to be the game-winning touchdown, as depicted in the accompanying photo.

Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel Photo

With the Packers missing at least 3 defensive backs for this game (Sam Shields, Damarious Randall and Quinten Rollins), how in the world will they defend against Matt Ryan and especially Julio Jones?  Mere preparation may not be enough, and Micah Hyde says they will be praying for a way to stop Julio Jones.  I will be praying, too.  I'm not sure that will be enough.  Even though the Falcons have lost two close games in a row (to the Seahawks and Chargers), they obviously have a lot of firepower on offense.  They have scored 23 or more points in every game this year, and they scored over 40 points twice, something that the Packers have not done all year.

On the other hand, their defense is yielding plenty of points.  With one exception (the Broncos), the Falcons have given up at least 26 points in every game.  So this has the makings of a high-scoring game, assuming that the Packers can keep up their end of the bargain.  I suspect it will be the Packers mounting the furious comeback this time, and that, just like the Falcons last time, it will fall short at the end.

Getting Ugly - Time for a Turnaround

"Sweetness" photo from www.Packers.com

Before getting to the miserable Cowboys-Packers game, which the Packers lost 30-16, I will start off with a little Brett Favre joke, since this game was yet another Brett Favre tribute game, celebrating the receipt of his Pro Football Hall of Fame Ring, and the unveiling of his name on the stadium wall.  (As a semi-facetious aside, maybe it is time to stop having Favre tribute games, since the Packers look terrible whenever he is there for a game.)  The ceremony, which is worth a watch, can be found here.

Anyway, during the bye week, we spent a few nights in Arizona visiting family and friends, including a night at a beautiful resort in Scottsdale.  At breakfast, our waitress was a colorful woman from Wisconsin, who asked us as soon as she found out we were from Wisconsin if we were Packer fans. She proceeded to regale us with stories about how every team that stays at that hotel loses (the Patriots in the Super Bowl where the Giants ended their undefeated season, the Wisconsin Badgers, and the Packers in the playoffs vs. the Cardinals).  She then told us this joke, which she also told to Mike Holmgren when he stayed at the hotel.

Remember when Brett Favre retired, and then unretired and got traded to the Jets?  Then he got himself in trouble when he was caught sending pictures to that female reporter?  Well, did you hear what Deanna Favre said when she found out about it?  "Oh, those pictures were intended for me, but you know Brett, they were intercepted."

Which brings us back to the game.  No. 1 rushing offense meets no. 1 rushing defense.  Who comes out on top when the irresistible force meets the immovable object?  Sunday afternoon, it was not close.  The Cowboys' rookie sensation Ezekiel Elliott ran all over the Packers.  Let's face it, the Packers looked bad on both sides of the ball.  The defensive backs looked bad.  Sure, there were injuries that got worse during the game, but they did not play well Sunday.  The defensive line didn't make its presence known like it has done in other games.  The linebackers were relatively quiet, other than Julius Peppers knocking the ball out of Dak Prescott's hands early in the game.  Speaking of Dak Prescott, the game plan designed for him would have been a good plan for the Packers.  Lots of short, quick-release passes (you can call them dink and dunk if you want), punctuated by periodic shots down the field.  He missed some of those passes down the field, and he did give up his first interception of the year, but overall he thrived in this offense and looks as if he is the real deal, making things interesting when Tony Romo is healthy again.

But what is the deal with the Packers' offense?  The offensive line seems to be protecting Rodgers so well that sometimes I wondered if the broadcast feed had frozen, as everybody seemed to be standing still.  But in general, he was unable to do anything with the time they gave him.  Most of the pass plays seemed to be long-developing routes, which you would think would be fine given the time he was getting, but either the receivers weren't getting open, or Rodgers wasn't pulling the trigger.  And when he did pull the trigger, he was missing more often than not.  Given his sudden and unexpected loss of accuracy, this offense just isn't working.  They need to go with the dink and dunk, fast-release, screen pass, etc. game plan, then taking those periodic shots downfield.  Right now, opposing defenses don't seem to think they have to fear the long pass, they drop into a Cover-2 defense, and are prepared to concede the underneath passes, which the Packers seem to have no interest in taking.

The Packers' first drive, which ended in a field goal, was better than most of their other drives in the game, precisely because they combined the running game with the short passing game.  Later in the game, Rodgers was too frequently seen just standing around in the backfield looking for the big play, or trying to get the Cowboys to jump offside.  It is as if he just isn't content taking the available short passes to march down the field gradually.  Sure, he missed some of those short passes when he did try to take them, and receivers dropped catchable balls, but a strategy of marching down the field in small chunks would have been much more successful than what we saw out there.

On a short week, the Bears come to town for the first of their two annual meetings.  The Packers are incredibly banged up, with the following players either being out or at least questionable for tomorrow's game: Starks, Lacy, Adams, Cobb, Cook on offense, and Shields, Randall and Rollins on defense.  There are no gimme games in the NFL, particularly not when the team is not playing well, and with that many injuries.  And especially not in a rivalry game between storied rivals like the Bears and Packers.

Right now, neither team is playing well.  The Bears, at 1-5, have beaten only the Lions, and last week they let a win get away against the Jaguars.  Leading 13-0 at the start of the 4th quarter, the Bears were outscored 17-3 in that quarter and ending up losing, 17-16.  Can the Bears be just what the doctored ordered for the Packers, letting them end their homestand on a win and have a week and a half off to prepare for their next game?  Who knows, but I sure hope so.

Cowboys Are Next Up!

"How Can This Not be a Catch?"  Photo by Rob Carr, Getty Images

The Packers, after their week off of rest and relaxation, won their game against the Giants last Sunday night, 23-16.  This was not really unexpected, as the Packers have had a great record of winning the games following byes under Mike McCarthy.

In the first half, things looked good on both sides of the ball, with the defense largely shutting down the Giants, holding them to a pair of field goals, despite their offensive weapons including Odell Beckham, Jr., who maybe has finally gotten the message about keeping his act together on the field.  The offense looked pretty sharp, but not overpowering.  There was lots of Eddie Lacy, lots of Davante Adams, a really dominating performance by the offensive line, and many of the rhythm passes, quick release, screen pass plays, and unusual formations that seem to work to the Packers' advantage.  There were too many dropped and missed passes, and of course Rodgers' two interceptions, but overall, the offense was above average in the first half.  The interceptions were the only thing keeping the Giants in the game.

The second half was less inspiring, except for the bruising, never-say-die, keep-the-pile-moving 13 yard run by Aaron Ripkowski.  Other than that, there was lots of sputtering on offense.  It didn't help that Lacy missed the latter part of the game, but even before that, Rodgers seemed to struggle against the Giants, who seemed to be playing more zone coverage in the second half, and even the dreaded Cover-2, although that is sometimes hard to tell from the broadcast tape.  When the opposition adjusts its game plan in the second half, the Packers have to do a better job of adjusting to the adjustment.  The Packers were never in serious jeopardy of losing this game, so "all's well that ends well," but the Packers really don't need to keep making it as hard on themselves (or their fans) as they do.  If the Giants had recovered Starks' fumble with 2:41 to go, or if Cobb did not make the 3rd down catch on the next play (the one where he got folded up like a lawn chair), this game could easily have been tied.  And we all know the Packers' recent record in overtime.

Meanwhile, with the Cowboys coming to town for another rematch of the "how can that not be a catch" game, the Packers will have their hands full.  The Cowboys, at 4-1, are no joke, and that is without Tony Romo (or could that be a plus?) and with Dez Bryant missing a lot of time.  At this time, it looks increasingly unlikely that Bryant will play on Sunday, but that still leaves them with rookie phenom running back Ezekiel Elliott, no. 2 receiver Terrance Williams, and no. 3 receiver Cole Beasley.  Both of them are a significant dropoff from Bryant, but they are serviceable.  Rookie QB Dak Prescott has impressed, he seems to be playing better each week, and (amazing for a rookie) he has not thrown an interception in his first five starts.

It is another Favre tribute game, and the last one did not go too well.  At least the weather should be better this time.  If the defense plays like it has so far this year (top 10 in overall defense and number 1 in rushing defense), all they need is more consistency on offense and they should win this game.

More Like It!

Davante Adams' Lambeau Leap. Photo by Dan Powers, USA Today

It  was great to see the Packers get off to a fast start against the Lions. Despite the fact that they were missing 5 starters on defense, the Packers raced to a 31-3 lead late in the first half. They are taking a lot of heat for almost letting the game get away from them since the lead narrowed to 34-27 late in the 4th quarter, and needed a couple of first downs on offense to make sure the Lions did not get the chance to tie the game. They got them, and closed out the win.

My favorite play of the game was Ty Montgomery's kickoff play. Those Stanford players are smart! Ty Montgomery turned an obscure rule about when a ball is deemed to be out of bounds to his advantage, by being certain to touch a kickoff ball bouncing around near the pylon while his feet were out of bounds, thereby rendering the ball out of bounds and giving the Packers the ball at the 40 yard line. He explained that any kick returner would know that rule (and indeed, Randall Cobb did the same thing a few years ago), but he is being way too modest. I have seen NFL kick returners do really stupid things from lack of knowledge of the rules. The announcers were in the process of explaining all the mistakes Montgomery had made when the ref announced the penalty against the Lions. So the "professional" announcers had no idea what the rule is. Good for Montgomery and Cobb for knowing the rule, and good for the Packers' special teams staff for teaching it.

Another favorite play was Damarious Randall just stealing the ball right out of Eric Ebron's hands in the second quarter and returning it over 40 yards the other way. It reminded me of maybe the earliest Packers' play I can remember - Jesse Whittenton stealing the ball right out of a player's hands, and then returning it the other way. Although I don't remember the opponent, this was most likely his steal of the ball from Alex Webster of the Giants in 1961.

The great thing about this game in the first half was the stinginess of the Packers' defense (especially against the run), while the Packers' offense suddenly became deadly efficient, scoring on all 5 drives of the first half (not counting running out the clock at the end of the half). All of the things I wanted to see took place in that first half: quick release passes, more emphasis on the running game, much less dancing around in the pocket waiting for something to open up.

So what exactly happened in the second half? Was it more of the "kill the clock offense" and "prevent defense" that I have complained about in past years? In watching the game a second time, my answer is, "yes and no." On offense, they certainly ran the ball more than they usually do, but on the other hand, they were getting first downs that way, so it wasn't exactly the dreaded "run, run, pass, punt." On defense, they weren't playing the traditional, everybody deep sort of prevent defense, but there is no question that they switched more to a loose zone coverage defense in the second half, in an effort to prevent most long gains. You can certainly say that the overall strategy worked: they won the game. And the Lions never had the ball with the chance to tie the game, as the Packers were able to run out the final 3:34 after the Lions scored to make it 34-27. But is is frustrating watching a 28 point lead almost get away from the Packers. I would like to see a little more aggressiveness, on both sides of the ball, at least part of the way into the third quarter.

Well, the unusual 4 game home-stand now continues with the Giants coming to town on Sunday night. The Giants have done lots of damage to the Packers over the last 10 years, but I think this time will be different. The Giants were pretty well dismantled by the Vikings on Monday night. While that probably says more about the Vikings potentially being the real deal than it says about the Giants, the Giants certainly have their problems, especially on defense. And it is now clear that if you succeed in getting under Odell Beckham's skin, he will effectively take himself out of the game. I look forward to another Packers win Sunday night.  I certainly expect that the game will be more entertaining, and more enlightening, than the debate between two pathetic candidates that will be showing at the same time.

More Like It!

Davante Adams' Lambeau Leap. Photo by Dan Powers, USA Today

It  was great to see the Packers get off to a fast start against the Lions. Despite the fact that they were missing 5 starters on defense, the Packers raced to a 31-3 lead late in the first half. They are taking a lot of heat for almost letting the game get away from since the lead narrowed to 34-27 late in the 4th quarter, and needed a couple of first downs on offense to make sure the Lions did not get the chance to tie the game. They got them, and closed out the win.

My favorite play of the game was Ty Montgomery's kickoff play. Those Stanford players are smart! Ty Montgomery turned an obscure rule about when a ball is deemed to be out of bounds to his advantage, by being certain to touch a kickoff ball bouncing around near the pylon while his feet were out of bounds, thereby rendering the ball out of bounds and giving the Packers the ball at the 40 yard line. He explained that any kick returner would know that rule (and indeed, Randall Cobb did the same thing a few years ago), but he is being way too modest. I have seen NFL kick returners do really stupid things from lack of knowledge of the rules. The announcers were in the process of explaining all the mistakes Montgomery had made when the ref announced the penalty against the Lions. So the "professional" announcers had no idea what the rule is. Good for Montgomery and Cobb for knowing the rule, and good for the Packers' special teams staff for teaching it.

Another favorite play was Damarious Randall just stealing the ball right out of Eric Ebron's hands in the second quarter and returning it over 40 yards the other way. It reminded me of maybe the earliest Packers' play I can remember - Jesse Whittenton stealing the ball right out of a player's hands, and then returning it the other way. Although I don't remember the opponent, this was most likely his steal of the ball from Alex Webster of the Giants in 1961.

The great thing about this game in the first half was the stinginess of the Packers' defense (especially against the run), while the Packers' offense suddenly became deadly efficient, scoring on all 5 drives of the first half (not counting running out the clock at the end of the half). All of the things I wanted to see took place in that first half: quick release passes, more emphasis on the running game, much less dancing around in the pocket waiting for something to open up.

So what exactly happened in the second half? Was it more of the "kill the clock offense" and "prevent defense" that I have complained about in past years? In watching the game a second time, my answer is, "yes and no." On offense, they certainly ran the ball more than they usually do, but on the other hand, they were getting first downs that way, so it wasn't exactly the dreaded "run, run, pass, punt." On defense, they weren't playing the traditional, everybody deep sort of prevent defense, but there is no question that they switched more to a loose zone coverage defense in the second half, in an effort to prevent most long gains. You can certainly say that the overall strategy worked: they won the game. And the Lions never had the ball with the chance to tie the game, as the Packers were able to run out the final 3:34 after the Lions scored to make it 34-27. But is is frustrating watching a 28 point lead almost get away from the Packers. I would like to see a little more aggressiveness, on both sides of the ball, at least part of the way into the third quarter.

Well, the unusual 4 game home-stand now continues with the Giants coming to town on Sunday night. The Giants have done lots of damage to the Packers over the last 10 years, but I think this time will be different. The Giants were pretty well dismantled by the Vikings on Monday night. While that probably says more about the Vikings potentially being the real deal than it says about the Giants, the Giants certainly have their problems, especially on defense. And it is now clear that if you succeed in getting under Odell Beckham's skin, he will effectively take himself out of the game. I look forward to another Packers win Sunday night.  I certainly expect that the game will be more entertaining, and more enlightening, than the debate between two pathetic candidates that will be showing at the same time.