DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Aaron Rodgers regularly changed Mike McCarthy's play calls at line of scrimmage

Thanks allot.

Teams want to hire the “offensive genius” as their head coach because they are worried that when/if that guy becomes good as a coordinator, he leaves and the team is screwed.

I have the Andy Reid in Philly feeling about McCarty. I'm not saying I'm definitely right but it has all the makings of a similar situation down to John Dorsey being there.

Or when people use to when it should be too?

I think while AR is a great QB, he lacks on of the most important traits.. He's not a leader. He doesn't rally the team and get everyone behind him. Love watching him play but if you can't work with your HC for the sake of winning then there's noone else to blame. That being said, I don't think McCarthy is a bad coach, they just needed a different voice. I think there will be alot of competition for him if we indeed are interested

I think it's a simple formula. When you have your QB and HC not working together, at some point the friction gets to the point that a decision has to be made which to change and which to move forward with. Same goes for the HC and GM.

That was intentional. YTown and I were having some fun.

This thread has gone off the rails, it's time to shut it down.

In what world is punting on 4th and 2, down in the 4th quarter with 4:20 (hi Swish) left in the game a good idea? If I were Aaron Rogers, I would have seriously considered just staying on the field and picking up those two yards right there.

lol i just checked into this thread ... what the ... HAHA

Not so quick my friend!

Weather oar knot you think you kneed a brake, its best if you can due witch ever won you think agrees with you're principals.

Back to the thread ..... I wonder how many of Rodgers's problems in Green Bay this year were McCarthy alone .... and how much was a combination of McCarthy and Brian Gutekunst. Green Bay made some personnel decisions that Rodgers publicly disagreed with, such as not bringing Jordy Nelson back. They also reportedly chose to not resign his personal QB coach.

Wait didn't you just in another thread tell posters what to post? And haven't you stated a thousand times "football talk football talk only guys, football talk"

It's just goofing around.

Why try to start another argument? Just let it go.

Not sure where to talk about this and I didn't want to start a new thread, but I think Peyton Manning's "Detail" episodes would be a good watch for those of you who like to learn about football.

They are very short. He talks about coverages and pre and post-snap reads. He talks about calling two plays in the huddle.

Some nice, quick educational takes for those who like to learn about the game rather than pretend they know the game.

Ty sir ... hopefully google will be my friend ...

Wish they had all this “educational” type stuff when i was younger ...

Yeah, I just watched an clip on D. Watson on NFL Network. It was against the Browns. Some good stuff about disguising coverages and such.

I don't know if that one is online yet, but others are and they all are pretty good. Short clips that don't take a lot of time to watch, but educational for guys like you. I thought of you and ddub right away because I know both of you love to learn.

Either google wasn’t my friend or its only on espn ... cost 4.99/month .... this ones gonna test me ... i vowed 20 years ago to never spend another dime on anything espn ...

Any clue if there online for free anywhere? ..

Your talking about the show “Detail” .... yes?

Here are a few:

Watson against Browns:

http://www.espn.com/watch/player?id=25469200




Baker and Mahommes:






Rosen and changing plays:

https://www.facebook.com/ESPN/videos/peyton-mannings-detail-on-josh-rosen/360722774499555/ H

thanks very .. i enjoy clips like that

I like how Peyton combines some humor while educating folks.

Peyton would make one helluva coach in the film room

he's gonna end up on MNF .. they throw the bank at him IMO, especially since Witten is a disaster

Not sure how many of you watched Peyton's Detail videos, but one of the funny parts in the Watson video is where he is looking at the Brown's defense and he started talking about the names of the coverages.

It sounded confusing, but I'll give a couple of examples of why they are named as they are. For example, Cover 0 is where everyone is in man to man. That's easy to understand. Cover 1 is where everyone is in man except you have a deep safety in the middle of the field. That's easy. Cover 2 is where you have two deep safeties and field is divided in half. Pretty easy to understand.

Cover 3 is where you have a deep safety in the middle of the field and two corners who are responsible for the area on their side of the field. Thus, the field is divided into thirds. A little harder.

Cover 4 is where you play your 2 corners and 2 safeties in deep zone coverage [they are responsible for their fourth of the field and then play man or zone underneath w/your linebackers and or nickel and dime backs. A bit more complicated to understand.

The tricky ones are Cover 6, and 8. For example, Cover 6 is where you are playing Cover 2 on one side of the field and Cover 4 on the other. Teams like the Steelers blitz out of this a lot.

Cover 8 is different. It means you have 8 men on the LOS. I'm not too familiar w/this one. We never played it.

What's really tricky is when a team will give you a cover 2 look pre-snap and then switch to Cover 4 or 6 post-snap. That is why I talk about pre and post-snap reads a lot. Things are not always as they seem and a lot of qbs get confused by the changing looks. Especially young qbs.

Both of my favorite teams play way too much Cover 0. The Buckeyes did not have the personnel to do it and they almost NEVER came out of cover 0. Teams like Maryland gashed us all game long and we never went to a zone, cover 2, anything but get killed all game.


The Browns mix it up more, but they still run too much cover 0. It's too easy for even young QBs to send a back in motion to the flat and recognize it's man, see the safeties position, too easy of a read. I have thought all year long that we should be giving Schobert the autonomy to audible when he see's these QBs motion giving away our man looks. It has not happened to date as far as I can tell.

thanks, that makes sense. Cover 0 clearly is most risky and aggressive .. to me, swtiching defenses post-snap is ideal ... as long as you don't confuse yourself

Thanks! I am not alone in that opinion. Witten is awful on there. Needs to go. Watched less MNF after listening to him first time out.

Seems like we have Amazing Faith in the NFL product, that marketing can do no wrong for the NFL or ESPN. Any kind of antics, lunacy, drivel, or smart is OK. THEY will watch it. Some of those numbers were falling off; just want football, not People -styled broadcasts.

Replacing Witten with something better suits me. Something coherent, please.

Agree on Witten .. he's an abortion. Can barely talk and constantly contradicts himself or says dumb stuff.

The part about pre and post-snap reads is a big reason why it's good to play both safeties deep, when practical. You can disguise the coverages better, and they're both in a position to make plays in the passing game.

With one safety deep and another in the box, things get trickier. Cover 1 and Cover 3 are still easy looks to play from that look, but you can't really use the box safety in deep coverage. Well there are endless wrinkles and it does happen on occasion with freak athletes and such, but not commonly.

Other wrinkles to add to your basic coverages.. various combo coverages. Say you're playing cover 3 but a slot receiver has been killing you over the middle, you might play man on him while the rest of the defense is in zone.

It can go the other way too. Say you're playing man to man with 4 rushers... you still have two guys left to play with. The most traditional coverage would be to have those (usually safeties) play deep, but it's helpful to change things up. Play a short zone, or if against a player like Cam, you'd use a QB spy sometimes, that sort of thing. If the offense is predictable and has the running back consistently in pass protection, you might not need to put a man on him at all.. another guy to play with as a rusher or in coverage.

Agreed that a lot of QBs get confused by the changing looks. There's not a whole lot of time back there to think. The best QBs are usually very smart, quick decision makers, who have played in the offense for some time so can play with instinct and not deep thought. There's thinking but it has to happen quickly.

In the leadup to the draft, there was one segment that went through how the rookie QBs did when drawing up plays and such, and Mayfield was far and away the best and most knowledgeable about it. That shows on the field as well..

I have absolutely no clue how Dorsey & McCarthy feel about each other. But on paper, a Dorsey, McCarthy, Baker triumvirate could be epic.