Though he hasn’t achieved the ultimate objective of winning a Super Bowl title, one thing that hasn’t been a problem in the three-plus years of the Matt LaFleur era is stacking up wins in the regular season. Yet, to this point, the 2022 Green Bay Packers have not felt nearly as formidable. CBS Sports described Green Bay as “lacking punch” after a narrow OT win over Bailey Zappe’s New England Patriots. Early in the season and sitting at 3-1, it really didn’t feel appropriate to sound the alarm. For many fans, that changed last Sunday when the Packers lost overseas to the New York Giants in a closing sequence that displayed many worrisome qualities of their offense.
Aaron Rodgers wasn’t immune to criticism. In fact, he’s been at the forefront of it alongside LaFleur and defensive coordinator Joe Barry, whose unit has struggled to produce at levels one would expect with that much individual talent. Postgame interviews were revealing, with the most interesting commentary coming from Aaron Jones.
Jones told reporters he’d “put [his] money on giving me or A.J. Dillon two downs to get two yards” but also acknowledged that “at the same time, I’m not the quarterback, so I don’t know what A-Rod’s seeing.” Rodgers has been criticized in recent days over his apparent decisions to play against the team’s strength, the ground game. But I’m here to argue that the true problem isn’t passing too much. Green Bay has to have a multi-dimensional attack that fully utilizes its MVP signal-caller, and there’s someone who can bring the “punch” many of us are looking for: rookie wideout Christian Watson.
Watson, whom the Packers spent two second-round picks on, was the only major addition to a wideout room that had just lost Davante Adams. His combination of size and speed got him all the attention he needed coming from an FCS school in NDSU. It felt like he could grow up fast, sparking Green Bay’s downfield attack and to some extent replacing departed deep-threat Marquez Valdes-Scantling. On the first play of the season — the first play of his professional career — he had one of the worst drops you will ever see.
But once we could get our hands off our heads, it’s easy to see how, rookie moment aside, the play was encouraging. He burned Patrick Peterson on a great route. Since he did end up making it to the NFL, I’m going to assume he makes that play a lot more often than not – he sure thinks so. The problem is, he hasn’t gotten more big opportunities since, having ostensibly been relegated to the role that Tyler Ervin previously held: pretty much exclusively running jet sweeps.
It feels like another example of how plays and decisions are interpreted solely by their result. Being results-based sounds like a logical pattern of thought. However, you have to look at the probabilities of the Watson play, understanding that in about 90% of cases that is a 75-yard touchdown. What played out in reality was simply the other 10%.
I’ll give you another, very common example: Coaches who go for two to try and win the game as opposed to tying with an extra point are either geniuses who need wheelbarrows for their balls or dumbasses who should be flipping burgers at McDonalds. It all depends on whether or not the team converts. The only difference is a single play, the smallest of sample sizes during which any number of variables may alter the result.
The same arguments are dragged out on fourth-and-ones and other crunch-time calls. How about LaFleur’s decision to kick a field goal late in the 2020 NFC Championship game? He chose to make it 31-26 and, if not for a very generous PI call against Kevin King on a pass that was uncatchable to begin with, the Packers would have gotten the ball back with 1:41 remaining and a chance to win. The path he decided against? One shot from the eight-yard-line to score and then convert the two-point try, giving the ball back to Brady with plenty of time and hoping for OT.
I’m not saying LaFleur made the right decision. I am simply asking you to imagine how different the conversation would be, how LaFleur would surely have been praised, if that ridiculous flag hadn’t been thrown.
Watson can and must be a spark for this passing attack down the stretch. There’s simply too much potential there on a team otherwise bereft of his game-changing speed. He’s been dealing with a bum hamstring, but I’m not talking about this Sunday, I’m talking about this winter. LaFleur, who calls plays, comes out of pretty much every game talking about how Aaron Jones needs more touches as if he doesn’t control that. But, Jones will cease to average anywhere near seven yards per carry if the Packers cannot develop a true passing attack to keep defenses guessing.
Packers fans probably haven’t spent a ton of time thinking about winning their division recently, it’s all about getting Rodgers his elusive second ring, and that simply isn’t going to happen with Watson running jet sweeps all day and Randall Cobb being the only reliable target on third down.
Romeo Doubs, who, in stark contrast to Watson, came on board with minimal expectations as a fourth-rounder, has brought the most explosiveness to Green Bay outside the numbers so far. Doubs is developing into who he needs to be if the Packers are going to make a run. Cobb and Allen Lazard are going to be Cobb and Allen Lazard. The untapped upside in this passing game, barring a rare midseason addition, is in Watson.
It’s hard to believe more schematic effort wouldn’t go into exploring that upside if we’d lived out a slightly different sequence of events, the more likely scenario in which he caught that ball and put the league on notice. As soon as Watson is healthy, get him moving north and south. Bring back Ervin if you desperately need a jet man. Maybe the offense will find something it’s lacked to this point. Maybe teams like the Giants won’t even have the chance to beat them on one single fourth-and-two.
