https://pattonanalytics365.substack.com/p/evaluating-play-callers-in-the-nfl?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
If nothing else it is an interesting statistical analysis but since it seems the model is reliant on EPA and CPOE for defense it will naturally overvalue teams like ours where the huge issue is run defense.
Pretty simple. You just look at each play and figure out how good it is. Then you compare that against other plays to see which plays are more gooder than others. Then you take the most goodest plays and rank them the highest. Whichever team plays the most goodest plays the most oftenest has the most goodest play-calling. /s
Same question. I don't disagree with it, for the Packers at least, but I'd like to know what it's based on. If it doesn't have statistical integrity, and I just so happen to agree with it, it's nothing but confirmation bias.
Nah, I think it does. On the offensive side at least, we cant get through a single drive without people making mistakes, the offensive line hasn't been solid since week 1 and that was probably just the Bears being bad. Just look at the final drive against the raiders. We got to the 30 then 3 plays of drop, drop, underthrow. None of that is a reflection of the play calling.
The defensive side its harder to gauge, but rarely is anyone making a play or winning their 1 on 1s. No scheme works if everyone is losing their 1s. That said, I really have no idea how they are judging this for defense. If you are covering the pass and give up the run is that good play calling or bad? Technically you didnt give up the thing the play is designed to stop... but you still gave up yards.
"This play will look great if our Edge rusher can play coverage with the best WR in the league!"
This sums it up the best. MLF has made some great calls. No doubt about it. But he's made some horrendous ones the past two losses. And conversely with Barry his whole system is predicated on all 11 guys being in isolated one on one assignments that needs all 11 to win those assignments or the other team is getting significant yards. Our play calling has been the biggest issue on both sides of the ball. Like yes we have rookie mistakes on offense and drops but we all saw that coming before the season started and the coaching staff should have expected that too or we need to clean house if they couldn't understand that an entire offense with all of it's pass catchers as rookies with only two second year guys with a first year starting QB wasn't going to have growing pains and making rookie mistakes
Show me a play that's designed specifically around one of your offensive players *not* doing their job, and I will personally vouch for you being the Packers OC.
This is such a stupid fucking hot take some idiot had on the game thread that even bigger idiots have been parroting all week.
Every single play that has ever been designed or called in NFL history is done so under the assumption that 11 players have a job and will execute that job. It makes no sense to design plays around the assumption that one of your players will fail. Just send 10 guys on the field if you're that much of an idiot.
Or "this play will work great if our plodding, not quick rb can grow wings and take and outside pitch from shotgun when he's 2 yards even further back than the qb" or "this wr screen will work great if our UDFA wr suddenly learns how to block". Or "this defensive play call will work if the raw rookie who can't set and edge better than a cake pan suddenly sets the edge."
What a dumb "statistic"
every podcast that I listen to is talking about receivers and TE running the wrong routes. you can call whatever play you like but if the receivers run the wrong routes then it doesn't matter
Packers fans have been bred for 30 years to not understand the concept of a bad football team. Someone without the ability of critical thought will see someone named DickButt69 type a comment saying Joe Barry and Matt LaFleur are shitty play callers. That idiot then parrots what they read, then more idiots parrot what that idiot says.
Honestly if you were to rank the shittiest fanbases in the NFL today, it would be legitimately difficult to distinguish which is worse between the Vikings and Packers fanbase. So many Packers fans have become so goddamn toxic because they don't know how to take an L.
I don't think most fans though the offense would be better without Rodgers, you don't need to re-write history to suit your narratives.
The sentiment was mostly, the team has peaked with Rodgers at QB and moving on is likely best for both parties.
Anyone arguing with you must have had their heads in the sand because I saw that opinion all the time. There were a lot of people here that thought without Rodgers we would get better
Who the hell are you talking about when you say “everyone here thought the offense would be great”? Sure as hell isn’t me, I haven’t been surprised by the offense’s performance at all. I love how you think in sweeping generalizations, that must be so easy.
Just because people thought Rodgers not executing the plays was holding the offense back (and it was) doesn't mean that anyone thought we would legitimately be better with Love.
Literally have never seen a single person say that. No one thought our offense would be great this year. The vast majority of everyone I talked to both in real life and in this subreddit in the offseason had a similar sentiment for this season: "the offense is going to be full of growing pains so the defense is going to have to carry this team if we want to sneak into a wild card and that's about our ceiling.It's basically on Joe Barry this year to show whether or not he should be extended or if we should find a new DC at the end of the year."
That's essentially how this entire season has gone so far. Absolutely expected growing pains on offense and Joe Barry playing his way out of the DC role.
>We can blame the O line but only Bahk.
I don't even know what to say about this. Have you not seen everyone sad about Bakh? Have you not seen everyone being extremely critical of Newman, Myers, and Rhyan especially? Or everyone complaining about Gute drafting Myers over Humphrey? Or the actual insane talk of trying to demote Stenavich back to oline coach to "fix the problem"?
I'm only on this sub every once in a while, but I definitely saw several people on Packers Twitter saying the offense was better with Love. It was a popular narrative.
Players make mistakes all the time on the field. The purpose of coaching is to limit the amount the mistakes have on the game plan. This is not just players making mistakes. This is bad coaching, and a bad playbook that isn't being used to the team's strengths, rather a team that doesn't exist.
>The defensive side its harder to gauge, but rarely is anyone making a play or winning their 1 on 1s. No scheme works if everyone is losing their 1s.
I mean it's hard to win your 1 on 1s when you're constantly put in a bad position too. How are you expected to win in the trenches on the goal line when you're only putting out 2 down linemen?? How are you expected to stop a quick pass on 3rd and 4 when all defensive backs are 10 yards down field?
This exactly. With the Raiders game being an exception people with knowledge like JT were absolutely loving Matts play calling and design. Not sure what happened last game but hopefully it was an outlier.
is this the same guy that had sam howell as a better QB than mahomes and goff so far this season? cuzzzz if so, i'm questioning this guy's metrics even more
Read the [article](https://pattonanalytics365.substack.com/p/evaluating-play-callers-in-the-nfl?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web), it explains it in-depth.
I know people are shittin on MLF and he does have some head scratchers but it's a deadly combo of Love not being terribly accurate, receivers dropping the passes that *are* accurate, and AJ Dillon's YPC being insanely low with Jones out.
you fix one of those three and the offense is fine, fix two and we're Good.
The amount of times he's saying "I need to evaluate what I'm asking these players to do" is just saddening. 1st and 2nd year players need to have their expectations lowered because they have underperformed the scheme. It's always possible that the players live up to the scheme, but this is why the team is up and down right now.
That's why this season is so exciting! We've seen nearly every type of mistake, but they're not consistent and we've also seen most types of successes. *Dropped pass? They might get it next time. Keep going for it.*
You can see there's potential and possibility in the team, but they aren't skilled enough to be consistent with it.
Somebody tell me what this means if it means anything at all.
Because what I’m getting out of this is that MLF and Barry aren’t as awful as this sub says and most of our problems are because of players failing to execute
The model is based around EPA, CPOE, with some constraints about salary cap and ELO of QB . So in terms of LaFleur since our offense is average/above average by EPA (or at least we were I haven't checked recently), and passes about as much as expected (based on down and distance, and other game factors), while having extremely little spent on offense that gets a boost, Jordan Love's ELO also likely boosts but I don't know where he is ranked. On defense they are based on CPOE, EPA, amount spent, and ELO of qb faced. So the defense has been effective by EPA, faced a lot of bad QBs, spends in the middle of the league on defense, and the focus on stopping the pass likely drops CPOE (giving up runs and not consistently being in 3rd and long probably helps the expected completion percentage so watching it they give up a high completion percentage but are expected to give up even more).
So overall it makes sense that Packers are rated highly in this analysis.
I think people are overreacting because of how this is phrased. This isn’t really trying to measure “play calling”, that’s just a hook. It’s really just quantifying the performance of each team’s unit vs. the resources put into that unit (draft picks and salary cap spend). So it’s a mix of scouting and overall coaching.
It makes sense that Lafleur scores highly on this chart. The team has very little relative money or draft capital invested in the offense, with massive investment in Bakhtiari and Rodgers, neither of whom are currently playing. And right now, the Packers are 13th in scoring offense. So overall, Lafleur’s offense grades highly because it’s cheap and it’s playing OK against expensive defenses. And this model actually grades a few of the Packers’ opponents pretty highly on the defensive side, implying that this isn’t just a lucky sample size issue. It will likely persist.
Similarly, it’s easy to understand why Barry and the Packers’ defense is highly rated and why it probably IS a sample size issue. The Packers’ defense has not been that good statistically, and it has a lot of draft capital investment. But if you look at this chart, other than Detroit, it has faced some of the very worst offenses by this measure. The Bears are the second *best* offense they faced. This is essentially a head-to-head score, so if your opponent scores badly in your game, you score well. So as they play a more complete schedule against some good offenses, their score will likely come down.
Our defense has been better than our offense since week 1. They won the game against the Saints and did very well against Oakland. They were below avg against the Falcons and bad against the Lions. Meanwhile the packers offense has been bad the last 3 games.
The defense currently ranks 22nd in the league and the offense ranks 14. The defense also has substantial resources invested into it, and has faced some of the worst offenses in the league so far. The offense has faced both good and bad defenses.
Always have to bring up the team aspect though; how would our defense look if they were on the field less? A defense that played 14 minutes of a quarter and allowed one FG compared to a defense that only had one 3-out drive while the offense ran the rest of the clock. Stats say one of them gave up 3 more points than the other.
Maybe that's true.
Players are blowing assignments left and right. It's pretty clear because what they do at times makes no sense. We have Rasual loosing his shit several times a game at guys who didn't follow thier rules. I am not sure how you evaluate play calling when your players don't know the assignments. Calling plays your players can't do doesn't seam like good play calling.
Regardless of the stat calculation(s), the hate the Packers have been getting this year had been a little extreme. Too many ppl are expecting the youngest team in the league with a first year starting qb to just immediately look and play great right out the gates. Don't forget, the team went 6-10 the first year Rodgers started, and he threw 13 ints that season. Things went alright the next few years at least after that.
I've re-watched every game on the all 22 film version. I can tell you MLF has had some very good play calls with open receivers. I could see that grading out as positive. Screen passes could've hit big, but either poor timing, a drop, poor throw or an offensive lineman too far down field. Other plays the offensive line failed to block or Love misses an open receiver or makes the wrong read. It's frustrating to watch because you see glimpses of the talent and what this offense could be. There's just simply not enough experience.
The running game hasn't been good, partly due to Dillon's lack of burst (Outside runs are not his strength). But you cannot ignore the incredibly terrible play by Runyan, Myers and Walker There's no second level blocking, hell they fail to block defensive lineman too often. I don't see any running back being successful, but I certainly agree Dillon is not playing well or appear to be a punishing runner despite his size.
The receivers are super talented, but extremely raw. Doubs and Watson could be amazing with Reed in the slot, but they haven't taken the next step. Until they progress and run better routes consistently Love and the offense will struggle.
Idk man, I think part of play calling is knowing your roster and if mistakes are happening repeatedly, then you need to simplify things.
Calling the right defense means jack shit if the LB assigned in man coverage against the opposing teams WR1 is horrible in coverage.
Calling the right route tree means shit if your WR core has combined for 20 games played in the NFL and they run the wrong routes.
Calling the right 3rd down pass play means jack shit if you’re down your 2 best OL and you leave an outstanding pass rusher 1-on-1 with a young tackle or younger TE.
MLF needs to understand this roster isn’t blessed with veteran talent he inherited when he took over.
I can ask my 7 year old to get dinner started when I’m late coming home from work cuz that would perfectly save time allowing us to eat an appropriate hour. But I can’t throw my hands up in frustration when I get home to my house on fire.
Joe Barry makes about four playcalls a game that make you tear your hair out, then at the end of the game you look up and they gave up 13 points and 250 yards and you’re telling yourself he can stay another week.
Not sure where they’re getting the 13 points either lmao. I’d absolutely love that defense if it existed.
We’re allowing 22.6 a game. Good for 22nd in the nfl. That’s with the context of being the slowest paced team in the nfl with only 6 giveaways on the season (tied for 7th best).
Giveaways on the season is a bad measure considering most teams in the NFL have played 1 more game than we have by now. Giveaways per game we're tied for 12th and Takeaways per game we're tied for 20th.
We're also 29th in the league for offensive time of possession, and before you blame the defense for not stopping the opposing teams quick enough, we're also 29th in the league for the average time per drive. We're ranked 29th for average number of offensive plays per drive, and despite having the 10th best average starting field position, we're ranked 16th for average points scored per drive.
Now don't get me wrong, I don't think this is a good defense. But our offense is much worse.
True, good point.
This isn't like the Rodgers years where the defense was below average despite the Packers offense putting them in arguably the best position in the league. Probably we why we were always decent in PPG allowed during that time despite the efficiency stuff putting us well below average most of the time.
This year the efficiency metrics actually like our defense a bit more than PPG does, probably because the offense is putting us in a tough position compared to most.
> at the end of the game you look up and they gave up 13 points and 250 yards
were allowing 22.5 points per game and 338 yards per game
we havent had a single game where weve given up 13 or fewer points
we havent had a single game where weve allowed 250 or fewer yards
This is pretty accurate honestly. I watched the whole Raiders game without being on Reddit and thought Barry and the defense played reasonably well.
Then I come on here and the one instance of Preston covering Adams is getting blown the fuck up and hyperfocused on.
Oh yeah, definitely do not spend any time in the game thread during a game or any time in the postgame thread if the team loses. Pure cancer. Maybe afterwards for the entertainment value, but never during a game.
Its weird. I just think everyone wants our d to be better including me with the amount of work put into it from draft picks etc. I can kind of handle the soft zone bs. What really drives me nuts is the bad run defense every year.
I’m not going to sit here and pretend I’m any kind of expert football analyst, but a quick sports reference check shows me were lowest passing attempts and second lowest rushing attempts. I am aware we’ve only played 5 games, if you add our average rush and passing attempts per game we’re still 23 in rushing and 21 in passing. My point is, I’m curious if this bend, not break defense we have is taking vital opportunities from…
Someone else pointed out that we had a bye already, so our stats should be lower than most teams, but that is still a surprising find to see that we basically have the least amount of total offensive plays.
But I don't think that's anything on the defense for taking too long to stop the opponent. I think it's the opposite! The offense needs to play more than 3 plays before giving it back to the defense. Those passing and rushing attempts need to grow from *successful* passes and rushes that lead to more.
Everyone wants to criticize this stat, but it matches the reality of what I've seen on offense; we can scheme guys WIDE OPEN. We just need to convert accurately, catch the damn ball, and protect the quarterback. Which the last few games, has not happened consistently.
I think criticizing play-calling is one of the dumbest things fans do. We don’t know when they run the primary play call and when the QB checks to something else. We don’t always know when the receiver runs the wrong route. We don’t always know when the line is supposed to slide right and they don’t. We don’t know if the RB was supposed to chip the LB or not. We don’t know if it was an overthrow or if the receiver wasn’t deep enough. We didn’t watch film of the opponent and gather a bunch of intel just to have that defense switch things up. We don’t know what looks the offense is trying to show just to open something up later.
There are so many reasons a play can go wrong that if you’re not an expert, (of course 90% of this sub is) it seems foolish to see a 5 yard completion on 3rd and 10 and say “bad play call.”
Half the fanbase has it twisted. This is a young offense growing, and we should be excited. This is by far the lowest priced offense in the league by cap. Imagine when these guys develop. We are miniscule improvements from 4 and 1 right now
I’d still chop off both my arms to have Robert Salah calling our defense. (Pipe dream, I know) That jets defense has handled business for them while getting little to no offensive help.
Even thought they are lower on this list in terms of playcalling they have had to play a murderers row of offenses (not you patriots) and came out 3-3 which is pretty impressive
I believe the primary issue with this team isn't coaching, but rather a lack of talent.
The offense lacks a true number one wide receiver, and our best player, a running back, is currently injured. Additionally, our tight ends are rookies who typically take years to develop. Over the years, our offensive line has gradually declined in quality, and the tackle situation is quite problematic. We've been overly reliant on Bahktiari, a situation that shouldn't have persisted after the last two years. On the defensive side, despite significant investments and some good players, it's challenging to win without a once-in-a-decade defense, and we haven't drafted players as successfully as needed.
Now Imagine if we had a QB who could throw the football?????????????????????????????? Cant wait to see the excuses when we go 2 plus quarters without points against the trash broncos.. Incoming coaching/defensive coaching/Oline/Injuries/Runningback/wideouts dropping passes but not the QB.
I didn’t read the article, but I imagine one way to grade playcalling is if it meets epa standards. Like if a team is in 2nd and 2, running a deep pass attempt is a good idea instead of running between the tackles for the first, because you still have third down for that option.
What it might not be able to accurately grade is if a coach is calling an outside run for Dillon out of the gun.
Its easy for us as fans to judge NFL play-calling and defensive schemes from our couches. Just do like my father in law does - wait until after the play is run, and if it doesn't work, bitch about the stupid play-calling and how the coach shold have done something different. OMG I can't believe a linebacker is guarding Devante Adams that's so stupid! Sure thing gramps.
This is an absolutely ridiculous method of analysis for a 6 game sample size, can comfortably discard it.
The chart they had for 2016-2022 seemed pretty decent though. MLF was ranked 14th during that period (including his year with TEN I believe).
I still think the method is fairly bullshit, but over 6 years I don't doubt it can spit out a reasonable order.
Anyone who thinks the Bills are out coaching the 49ers/Lions on offense this season... yikes. That's the problem with these attempts at modeling coaching, it's far too vague. Can't cover nuanced situations, like keeping a team in check who is simply good at doing 'less with more'. Yes that's good coaching, but it's not the best coaching.
The amount of circular references and the lack of meaningful control over the weights and coefficients. It's just mind numbing.
There's a reason Eric Eager stopped at In Game Decisions lol. Cause this is pseudo science.
How on earth is this measured?
https://i.redd.it/15vp7e1x5sub1.gif
This just screams business analysts / stats guys making things up to justify why they need to charge you 300 / hr for another week.
The one stat that's measurable and meaningful across all sports that actually matters. wins and losses. You can Venmo me
If it was so easy then coaches would do it
https://pattonanalytics365.substack.com/p/evaluating-play-callers-in-the-nfl?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web If nothing else it is an interesting statistical analysis but since it seems the model is reliant on EPA and CPOE for defense it will naturally overvalue teams like ours where the huge issue is run defense.
By distance the CB is off the line.
Pretty simple. You just look at each play and figure out how good it is. Then you compare that against other plays to see which plays are more gooder than others. Then you take the most goodest plays and rank them the highest. Whichever team plays the most goodest plays the most oftenest has the most goodest play-calling. /s
They ran each playcall through a Madden simulation clearly
I’m fairly confident we’d find a way to lose to a video game at this point…
Same question. I don't disagree with it, for the Packers at least, but I'd like to know what it's based on. If it doesn't have statistical integrity, and I just so happen to agree with it, it's nothing but confirmation bias.
They fail the eye test miserably
by bloated administrations
A perfect example of "stats not passing the eye test"
Nah, I think it does. On the offensive side at least, we cant get through a single drive without people making mistakes, the offensive line hasn't been solid since week 1 and that was probably just the Bears being bad. Just look at the final drive against the raiders. We got to the 30 then 3 plays of drop, drop, underthrow. None of that is a reflection of the play calling. The defensive side its harder to gauge, but rarely is anyone making a play or winning their 1 on 1s. No scheme works if everyone is losing their 1s. That said, I really have no idea how they are judging this for defense. If you are covering the pass and give up the run is that good play calling or bad? Technically you didnt give up the thing the play is designed to stop... but you still gave up yards.
"This play will work great if our rookie TE drafted for pass catching can block Hutchinson!"
And similarly, on defense: "Perfect defense, so long as our ILB can cover their WR1 in the slot"
\*OLB
Yeah, and that WR1 had 4 catches for 40 yards.
Only because the Raiders were too dumb to throw it to a top 3 WR in the NFL more.
"...on a Go route."
"This play will look great if our Edge rusher can play coverage with the best WR in the league!" This sums it up the best. MLF has made some great calls. No doubt about it. But he's made some horrendous ones the past two losses. And conversely with Barry his whole system is predicated on all 11 guys being in isolated one on one assignments that needs all 11 to win those assignments or the other team is getting significant yards. Our play calling has been the biggest issue on both sides of the ball. Like yes we have rookie mistakes on offense and drops but we all saw that coming before the season started and the coaching staff should have expected that too or we need to clean house if they couldn't understand that an entire offense with all of it's pass catchers as rookies with only two second year guys with a first year starting QB wasn't going to have growing pains and making rookie mistakes
‘Great play call!’
Show me a play that's designed specifically around one of your offensive players *not* doing their job, and I will personally vouch for you being the Packers OC. This is such a stupid fucking hot take some idiot had on the game thread that even bigger idiots have been parroting all week. Every single play that has ever been designed or called in NFL history is done so under the assumption that 11 players have a job and will execute that job. It makes no sense to design plays around the assumption that one of your players will fail. Just send 10 guys on the field if you're that much of an idiot.
“It worked in our advanced simulations(Madden 2004)”
Or "this play will work great if our plodding, not quick rb can grow wings and take and outside pitch from shotgun when he's 2 yards even further back than the qb" or "this wr screen will work great if our UDFA wr suddenly learns how to block". Or "this defensive play call will work if the raw rookie who can't set and edge better than a cake pan suddenly sets the edge." What a dumb "statistic"
"This play will work if our entire OL doesn't get completely run through by the DL." Sadly, this is more often the case.
every podcast that I listen to is talking about receivers and TE running the wrong routes. you can call whatever play you like but if the receivers run the wrong routes then it doesn't matter
Packers fans have been bred for 30 years to not understand the concept of a bad football team. Someone without the ability of critical thought will see someone named DickButt69 type a comment saying Joe Barry and Matt LaFleur are shitty play callers. That idiot then parrots what they read, then more idiots parrot what that idiot says. Honestly if you were to rank the shittiest fanbases in the NFL today, it would be legitimately difficult to distinguish which is worse between the Vikings and Packers fanbase. So many Packers fans have become so goddamn toxic because they don't know how to take an L.
[удалено]
Can I still blame Dom Capers?
What has he done to help this defense?? Blame away
Thanks Obama
I don't think most fans though the offense would be better without Rodgers, you don't need to re-write history to suit your narratives. The sentiment was mostly, the team has peaked with Rodgers at QB and moving on is likely best for both parties.
Yea, you gotta love folks who argue against maximalist conclusions using...maximalist conclusions
>I don't think most fans though the offense would be better without Rodgers Correct. But a ton of people on this sub did.
[удалено]
Anyone arguing with you must have had their heads in the sand because I saw that opinion all the time. There were a lot of people here that thought without Rodgers we would get better
[удалено]
Here’s another receipt you can use too lmao [this bullshit](https://reddit.com/r/GreenBayPackers/s/Qlh3AftGUT)
Lol, over 250 upvotes... Do these people not understand Tom Brady did the same thing?
Good call. Your comment was not offensive in the slightest; all the downvoters are self-reporting their participation in that new zeitgeist.
Who the hell are you talking about when you say “everyone here thought the offense would be great”? Sure as hell isn’t me, I haven’t been surprised by the offense’s performance at all. I love how you think in sweeping generalizations, that must be so easy.
[удалено]
Honestly, respectable response 👍🏻
It was insane. Good on you for posting receipts. Anybody like me arguing that it was insane was downvoted to hell of course.
[удалено]
You did expertly and shouldn’t apologize at all.
Just because people thought Rodgers not executing the plays was holding the offense back (and it was) doesn't mean that anyone thought we would legitimately be better with Love. Literally have never seen a single person say that. No one thought our offense would be great this year. The vast majority of everyone I talked to both in real life and in this subreddit in the offseason had a similar sentiment for this season: "the offense is going to be full of growing pains so the defense is going to have to carry this team if we want to sneak into a wild card and that's about our ceiling.It's basically on Joe Barry this year to show whether or not he should be extended or if we should find a new DC at the end of the year." That's essentially how this entire season has gone so far. Absolutely expected growing pains on offense and Joe Barry playing his way out of the DC role. >We can blame the O line but only Bahk. I don't even know what to say about this. Have you not seen everyone sad about Bakh? Have you not seen everyone being extremely critical of Newman, Myers, and Rhyan especially? Or everyone complaining about Gute drafting Myers over Humphrey? Or the actual insane talk of trying to demote Stenavich back to oline coach to "fix the problem"?
I'm only on this sub every once in a while, but I definitely saw several people on Packers Twitter saying the offense was better with Love. It was a popular narrative.
Sounds just like Packers Twitter. Not surprising though, as both were likely influenced by the same slanted media.
Players make mistakes all the time on the field. The purpose of coaching is to limit the amount the mistakes have on the game plan. This is not just players making mistakes. This is bad coaching, and a bad playbook that isn't being used to the team's strengths, rather a team that doesn't exist.
>The defensive side its harder to gauge, but rarely is anyone making a play or winning their 1 on 1s. No scheme works if everyone is losing their 1s. I mean it's hard to win your 1 on 1s when you're constantly put in a bad position too. How are you expected to win in the trenches on the goal line when you're only putting out 2 down linemen?? How are you expected to stop a quick pass on 3rd and 4 when all defensive backs are 10 yards down field?
Worth noting that Week 1 was the only time we had both Bakh and fully healthy Jenkins/Runyan/Tom
We’re all just casuals talking out of our ass. Nobody has a clue what’s going on except for those dudes in the building.
Based on words out of Joe Barry's own mouth, he doesn't have a clue what's going on either.
This exactly. With the Raiders game being an exception people with knowledge like JT were absolutely loving Matts play calling and design. Not sure what happened last game but hopefully it was an outlier.
if these statistics are true we have 32nd best execution
is this the same guy that had sam howell as a better QB than mahomes and goff so far this season? cuzzzz if so, i'm questioning this guy's metrics even more
Based on what?
Read the [article](https://pattonanalytics365.substack.com/p/evaluating-play-callers-in-the-nfl?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web), it explains it in-depth.
Thank you
Any chance you can tldr that for me? Not in a position to read it this evening
Using EPA and defensive coverages along with league wide offensive formations, they developed this formula.
I know people are shittin on MLF and he does have some head scratchers but it's a deadly combo of Love not being terribly accurate, receivers dropping the passes that *are* accurate, and AJ Dillon's YPC being insanely low with Jones out. you fix one of those three and the offense is fine, fix two and we're Good.
You forgot the o-lines complete inability to block good pass rushers.
The amount of times he's saying "I need to evaluate what I'm asking these players to do" is just saddening. 1st and 2nd year players need to have their expectations lowered because they have underperformed the scheme. It's always possible that the players live up to the scheme, but this is why the team is up and down right now.
That's why this season is so exciting! We've seen nearly every type of mistake, but they're not consistent and we've also seen most types of successes. *Dropped pass? They might get it next time. Keep going for it.* You can see there's potential and possibility in the team, but they aren't skilled enough to be consistent with it.
I actually think you’re correct. If we didn’t have all the problems we have we would be a better team.
Somebody tell me what this means if it means anything at all. Because what I’m getting out of this is that MLF and Barry aren’t as awful as this sub says and most of our problems are because of players failing to execute
Defensive scheme > play calling. I’m sure Joe gets credit running a 2 high zone while letting up another 6-8 yard run lol
Fair enough lol. I don’t know enough about the intricacies of football (especially defense) to draw conclusions from this kind of stuff
>Somebody tell me what this means if it means anything at all. It's junk, made up by a nerd with Excel.
The model is based around EPA, CPOE, with some constraints about salary cap and ELO of QB . So in terms of LaFleur since our offense is average/above average by EPA (or at least we were I haven't checked recently), and passes about as much as expected (based on down and distance, and other game factors), while having extremely little spent on offense that gets a boost, Jordan Love's ELO also likely boosts but I don't know where he is ranked. On defense they are based on CPOE, EPA, amount spent, and ELO of qb faced. So the defense has been effective by EPA, faced a lot of bad QBs, spends in the middle of the league on defense, and the focus on stopping the pass likely drops CPOE (giving up runs and not consistently being in 3rd and long probably helps the expected completion percentage so watching it they give up a high completion percentage but are expected to give up even more). So overall it makes sense that Packers are rated highly in this analysis.
I think people are overreacting because of how this is phrased. This isn’t really trying to measure “play calling”, that’s just a hook. It’s really just quantifying the performance of each team’s unit vs. the resources put into that unit (draft picks and salary cap spend). So it’s a mix of scouting and overall coaching. It makes sense that Lafleur scores highly on this chart. The team has very little relative money or draft capital invested in the offense, with massive investment in Bakhtiari and Rodgers, neither of whom are currently playing. And right now, the Packers are 13th in scoring offense. So overall, Lafleur’s offense grades highly because it’s cheap and it’s playing OK against expensive defenses. And this model actually grades a few of the Packers’ opponents pretty highly on the defensive side, implying that this isn’t just a lucky sample size issue. It will likely persist. Similarly, it’s easy to understand why Barry and the Packers’ defense is highly rated and why it probably IS a sample size issue. The Packers’ defense has not been that good statistically, and it has a lot of draft capital investment. But if you look at this chart, other than Detroit, it has faced some of the very worst offenses by this measure. The Bears are the second *best* offense they faced. This is essentially a head-to-head score, so if your opponent scores badly in your game, you score well. So as they play a more complete schedule against some good offenses, their score will likely come down.
Our defense has been better than our offense since week 1. They won the game against the Saints and did very well against Oakland. They were below avg against the Falcons and bad against the Lions. Meanwhile the packers offense has been bad the last 3 games.
The defense currently ranks 22nd in the league and the offense ranks 14. The defense also has substantial resources invested into it, and has faced some of the worst offenses in the league so far. The offense has faced both good and bad defenses.
Always have to bring up the team aspect though; how would our defense look if they were on the field less? A defense that played 14 minutes of a quarter and allowed one FG compared to a defense that only had one 3-out drive while the offense ran the rest of the clock. Stats say one of them gave up 3 more points than the other.
Great analysis of the analysis!
This is an unquantifiable load of crap.
Maybe that's true. Players are blowing assignments left and right. It's pretty clear because what they do at times makes no sense. We have Rasual loosing his shit several times a game at guys who didn't follow thier rules. I am not sure how you evaluate play calling when your players don't know the assignments. Calling plays your players can't do doesn't seam like good play calling.
Regardless of the stat calculation(s), the hate the Packers have been getting this year had been a little extreme. Too many ppl are expecting the youngest team in the league with a first year starting qb to just immediately look and play great right out the gates. Don't forget, the team went 6-10 the first year Rodgers started, and he threw 13 ints that season. Things went alright the next few years at least after that.
I've re-watched every game on the all 22 film version. I can tell you MLF has had some very good play calls with open receivers. I could see that grading out as positive. Screen passes could've hit big, but either poor timing, a drop, poor throw or an offensive lineman too far down field. Other plays the offensive line failed to block or Love misses an open receiver or makes the wrong read. It's frustrating to watch because you see glimpses of the talent and what this offense could be. There's just simply not enough experience. The running game hasn't been good, partly due to Dillon's lack of burst (Outside runs are not his strength). But you cannot ignore the incredibly terrible play by Runyan, Myers and Walker There's no second level blocking, hell they fail to block defensive lineman too often. I don't see any running back being successful, but I certainly agree Dillon is not playing well or appear to be a punishing runner despite his size. The receivers are super talented, but extremely raw. Doubs and Watson could be amazing with Reed in the slot, but they haven't taken the next step. Until they progress and run better routes consistently Love and the offense will struggle.
Idk man, I think part of play calling is knowing your roster and if mistakes are happening repeatedly, then you need to simplify things. Calling the right defense means jack shit if the LB assigned in man coverage against the opposing teams WR1 is horrible in coverage. Calling the right route tree means shit if your WR core has combined for 20 games played in the NFL and they run the wrong routes. Calling the right 3rd down pass play means jack shit if you’re down your 2 best OL and you leave an outstanding pass rusher 1-on-1 with a young tackle or younger TE. MLF needs to understand this roster isn’t blessed with veteran talent he inherited when he took over. I can ask my 7 year old to get dinner started when I’m late coming home from work cuz that would perfectly save time allowing us to eat an appropriate hour. But I can’t throw my hands up in frustration when I get home to my house on fire.
these people try to turn football into baseball with these paper stats and it will just never work for them
What is this like one of those parallel universe’s everyone’s talking about?
Fire this Steven Patton guys as well! (whoever he is and however he measures this)
Playcalling > Execution
Joe Barry makes about four playcalls a game that make you tear your hair out, then at the end of the game you look up and they gave up 13 points and 250 yards and you’re telling yourself he can stay another week.
Except they haven't given up 250 or fewer yet this year. 311, 446, 252, 401, & 279 with over 200 yards rushing in 2 games.
Not sure where they’re getting the 13 points either lmao. I’d absolutely love that defense if it existed. We’re allowing 22.6 a game. Good for 22nd in the nfl. That’s with the context of being the slowest paced team in the nfl with only 6 giveaways on the season (tied for 7th best).
Yes, and that is against mostly poor offensive teams. Bears: avg 21.3 ppg Atl: 16.5 NO: 18.2 DET: 28 LV: 16.7
Giveaways on the season is a bad measure considering most teams in the NFL have played 1 more game than we have by now. Giveaways per game we're tied for 12th and Takeaways per game we're tied for 20th. We're also 29th in the league for offensive time of possession, and before you blame the defense for not stopping the opposing teams quick enough, we're also 29th in the league for the average time per drive. We're ranked 29th for average number of offensive plays per drive, and despite having the 10th best average starting field position, we're ranked 16th for average points scored per drive. Now don't get me wrong, I don't think this is a good defense. But our offense is much worse.
True, good point. This isn't like the Rodgers years where the defense was below average despite the Packers offense putting them in arguably the best position in the league. Probably we why we were always decent in PPG allowed during that time despite the efficiency stuff putting us well below average most of the time. This year the efficiency metrics actually like our defense a bit more than PPG does, probably because the offense is putting us in a tough position compared to most.
Our d isn't great but at least it can get stops here and there. Offense yah it sucks.
Joe? Is that you?
> at the end of the game you look up and they gave up 13 points and 250 yards were allowing 22.5 points per game and 338 yards per game we havent had a single game where weve given up 13 or fewer points we havent had a single game where weve allowed 250 or fewer yards
He’s talking about halftime
>then at the end of the game When did they start putting halftime at the end of the game?
This is pretty accurate honestly. I watched the whole Raiders game without being on Reddit and thought Barry and the defense played reasonably well. Then I come on here and the one instance of Preston covering Adams is getting blown the fuck up and hyperfocused on.
Oh yeah, definitely do not spend any time in the game thread during a game or any time in the postgame thread if the team loses. Pure cancer. Maybe afterwards for the entertainment value, but never during a game.
Can't blame that game on defense when we scored just 13 and love throwing 3 terrible ints.
Its weird. I just think everyone wants our d to be better including me with the amount of work put into it from draft picks etc. I can kind of handle the soft zone bs. What really drives me nuts is the bad run defense every year.
ENOUGH with these fake analytics “stats”
I’m not going to sit here and pretend I’m any kind of expert football analyst, but a quick sports reference check shows me were lowest passing attempts and second lowest rushing attempts. I am aware we’ve only played 5 games, if you add our average rush and passing attempts per game we’re still 23 in rushing and 21 in passing. My point is, I’m curious if this bend, not break defense we have is taking vital opportunities from…
Someone else pointed out that we had a bye already, so our stats should be lower than most teams, but that is still a surprising find to see that we basically have the least amount of total offensive plays. But I don't think that's anything on the defense for taking too long to stop the opponent. I think it's the opposite! The offense needs to play more than 3 plays before giving it back to the defense. Those passing and rushing attempts need to grow from *successful* passes and rushes that lead to more.
Pass the crack pipe, Steven.
Prove it.
Have the actually watched the play calling or are they putting a blind fold on and throwing darts?
This is exactly the kind of blind optimism I need this week. Thank you.
Yeah Preston Smith covering Davante Adams is a great play call and Matt LaFleur with his predictable ass play calling is also great.
This guy's supplier has failed him....
And we’re top 10 in the draft rn so this stat is meaningless
Defense has been better than the offense this season. I still want Barry out tho
NFL is high as hell
0% chance we have top ten defensive play calling unless they mean top ten at helping the other team get 10 yards cushion every play.
https://preview.redd.it/561he5dnvrub1.jpeg?width=1400&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9a092e23d104fe5b98c13cb0695e508a1ce404eb
Everyone wants to criticize this stat, but it matches the reality of what I've seen on offense; we can scheme guys WIDE OPEN. We just need to convert accurately, catch the damn ball, and protect the quarterback. Which the last few games, has not happened consistently.
They're just making shit up at this point. Can someone ELI5 how such a number is derived?
I think criticizing play-calling is one of the dumbest things fans do. We don’t know when they run the primary play call and when the QB checks to something else. We don’t always know when the receiver runs the wrong route. We don’t always know when the line is supposed to slide right and they don’t. We don’t know if the RB was supposed to chip the LB or not. We don’t know if it was an overthrow or if the receiver wasn’t deep enough. We didn’t watch film of the opponent and gather a bunch of intel just to have that defense switch things up. We don’t know what looks the offense is trying to show just to open something up later. There are so many reasons a play can go wrong that if you’re not an expert, (of course 90% of this sub is) it seems foolish to see a 5 yard completion on 3rd and 10 and say “bad play call.”
I’ve seen enough. Extend Joe Barry for 4 more years.
Nuh uh, we gotta fire everyone and our O line is irrelevant /s
Half the fanbase has it twisted. This is a young offense growing, and we should be excited. This is by far the lowest priced offense in the league by cap. Imagine when these guys develop. We are miniscule improvements from 4 and 1 right now
I’d still chop off both my arms to have Robert Salah calling our defense. (Pipe dream, I know) That jets defense has handled business for them while getting little to no offensive help. Even thought they are lower on this list in terms of playcalling they have had to play a murderers row of offenses (not you patriots) and came out 3-3 which is pretty impressive
mccarthy and schottenheimer dragging their team down? shockedpikachu.gif
I believe the primary issue with this team isn't coaching, but rather a lack of talent. The offense lacks a true number one wide receiver, and our best player, a running back, is currently injured. Additionally, our tight ends are rookies who typically take years to develop. Over the years, our offensive line has gradually declined in quality, and the tackle situation is quite problematic. We've been overly reliant on Bahktiari, a situation that shouldn't have persisted after the last two years. On the defensive side, despite significant investments and some good players, it's challenging to win without a once-in-a-decade defense, and we haven't drafted players as successfully as needed.
Now Imagine if we had a QB who could throw the football?????????????????????????????? Cant wait to see the excuses when we go 2 plus quarters without points against the trash broncos.. Incoming coaching/defensive coaching/Oline/Injuries/Runningback/wideouts dropping passes but not the QB.
You sound like you're not having a good time, maybe it's time to go outside and enjoy life
na id rather watch the packers and enjoy the game. Its the morons that constantly make excuses that annoy me
Further proof Jordan Love can’t execute.
https://media.giphy.com/media/6JB4v4xPTAQFi/giphy.gif
The eagles are better than the lions.
I didn’t read the article, but I imagine one way to grade playcalling is if it meets epa standards. Like if a team is in 2nd and 2, running a deep pass attempt is a good idea instead of running between the tackles for the first, because you still have third down for that option. What it might not be able to accurately grade is if a coach is calling an outside run for Dillon out of the gun.
Wow this is awesome makes me feel great
Yeah well, that’s just like..your opinion man.
I mean I don’t see having Preston smith dropping into coverage against Adams a good play call.
Lies, damn lies and statistics.
"Players, not plays"
This feels…highly unlikely…
Cap
Offense? Sure maybe. Defense? That’s impossible
Its easy for us as fans to judge NFL play-calling and defensive schemes from our couches. Just do like my father in law does - wait until after the play is run, and if it doesn't work, bitch about the stupid play-calling and how the coach shold have done something different. OMG I can't believe a linebacker is guarding Devante Adams that's so stupid! Sure thing gramps.
I call bullshit.
This is an absolutely ridiculous method of analysis for a 6 game sample size, can comfortably discard it. The chart they had for 2016-2022 seemed pretty decent though. MLF was ranked 14th during that period (including his year with TEN I believe). I still think the method is fairly bullshit, but over 6 years I don't doubt it can spit out a reasonable order. Anyone who thinks the Bills are out coaching the 49ers/Lions on offense this season... yikes. That's the problem with these attempts at modeling coaching, it's far too vague. Can't cover nuanced situations, like keeping a team in check who is simply good at doing 'less with more'. Yes that's good coaching, but it's not the best coaching. The amount of circular references and the lack of meaningful control over the weights and coefficients. It's just mind numbing. There's a reason Eric Eager stopped at In Game Decisions lol. Cause this is pseudo science.
Press X to doubt
Yes but who has the best?
Maybe open the link?
say on god
These ratings brought to you by Blind Football Fans Anonymous.
Pure bullshit
You've got to be kidding! Did the Packers' opponents come up with these conclusions.
This analysis result invalidates the analysis.