"TED THOMPSONS FORMULA FOR SUCCESS SIZZLES ""

[Bretsky]

I know the article will get shredded; it's a good read with some good points

http://www.jsonline.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/mcginn/2017/01/28/mcginn-ted-thompsons-formula-success-fizzles/97136720/

[Bretsky]

“Hats off to the coaching staff,” one general manager said last week. “For keeping it together playing with that crap for the last seven or eight weeks.”

[RashanGary]

Time will tell. McGinn was talking shit like this before the Packers won the SB. Then before the season starts he says they look like SB contenders. Then when the season ends he cherry picks tidbits to write a piece like this. He doesn't know what he's talking about. He just writes whichever way the wind is blowing.

The hoody didn't win a sb for 10-12 years whatever it was between 2003 or 2004, whenever it was till 2014. Just like the pAts, the Packers are in it every year. We're gonna win another.

[mmmdk]

Just like the pAts, the Packers are in it every year. We're gonna win another.

I hope you are right but the Pats actually get back in it [SB] Packers don't. I do agree that Packers will win a SB again I'm just not sure when and if with AR.

PS - Stubby actually took a crap and when he got back whilst pulling up his pants; AR & co. had won him a SB ring. :wink:

[Bretsky]

Time will tell. McGinn was talking shit like this before the Packers won the SB. Then before the season starts he says they look like SB contenders. Then when the season ends he cherry picks tidbits to write a piece like this. He doesn't know what he's talking about. He just writes whichever way the wind is blowing.

The hoody didn't win a sb for 10-12 years whatever it was between 2003 or 2004, whenever it was till 2014. Just like the pAts, the Packers are in it every year. We're gonna win another.


McGinn always gets slammed because he writes for JS
All the Packer reporters feel like the above; they get interviewed weekly on ESPN 1070 on early morning shows and their views reflect the same.

[vince]

What a hack. Stirring up the anger of the uncritically thinking Ted Bashers.
This article is intellectually dishonest and devoid of journalistic integrity from start to finish.


How could Thompson, after watching the defense get ripped apart by the Falcons, even look McCarthy, his coaches and his players in the eye?
That defense is right. Think it was the 32nd ranked pass defense that was the problem Bob?


Green Bay Packers under general manager Ted Thompson would rather sit on their hands than procure players … at least veteran players.
Good one Bob. Ted’s preference is clearly to do nothing to win Super Bowls. Perhaps he actually felt the team had a strong core veteran group going into the season and a promising mix of 2nd/3rd year players developing nicely into starting-caliber and productive pros, and a talented group of rookies to develop at the bottom of the roster.

But anyway Bob, what veteran players are you suggesting that Ted should have procured rather than doing what he prefers to do – “watching the defense get ripped apart”?

Oh, OK, here’s your list. Got it Bob. Quality veteran defensive secondary help indeed – just what the doctor ordered. Piece of cake eh Bob?

Running back Matt Forte
Tight end Vernon Davis
Running back LeGarrette Blount
Pass rusher Dwight Freeney
Wide receiver Taylor Gabriel
Linebacker Jamie Collins
Those are just a few of many possibilities, and don’t tell me it’s second-guessing.


The Packers had six cornerbacks on the 53-man roster at the end of the season. Only two, LaDarius Gunter and Josh Hawkins, have a long history at the position.
A lot of injuries happened Bob. But you've been saying the same thing all year I'm sure right Bob? Wait, let's see what you did think of the crew at the beginning of the season Bob - before your ridiculous hindsight-based hackjob?

McGinn’s Annual Preseason Cornerback Assessments (http://www.packersnews.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/2016/09/08/mcginn-ranking-packers-roster-1-53/90044874/)


SAM SHIELDS, CB
Played his best football a year ago and enjoyed an injury-free, productive summer as the team’s shut-down corner. Early in camp Shields said there was nothing to prevent him from playing on a par with Patrick Peterson, Richard Sherman and the other premier corners.
“Injury-free” “shutdown corner”….hmmm

DAMARIOUS RANDALL, CB
He can run, jump, press and play off. He can tackle and blitz, too. Now into his second season after making the move from safety at Arizona State, Randall has the makings of being a reliable if not a big-play corner. He exudes confidence, an absolute necessity at the position.
Run, Jump, Press, Play-off, Tackle, Blitz – He can do it all…Big-play corner potential….hmmm

QUINTEN ROLLINS, CB
He ended last season as one of the club’s top three corners and enters this one the same way. Aggressive to the ball on short to intermediate routes. Came close to a bunch of interceptions in camp. With additional seasoning, those breakups might become picks. Physical in run support.
“Aggressive”, “Physical”, Ball-Hawk….hmmm

LaDARIUS GUNTER, CB
He went to camp as the No. 4 corner and ended camp as the No. 4 corner. Gunter is a resourceful, physical player with quickness and long arms. He must be skilled because his speed is below average. Gunter’s playing time might hinge on his ability to contribute on special teams.
“#4” Corner, “Resourceful”, “Physical”, “Skilled”, “Likely Special Teamer”….hmmm

JOSH HAWKINS, CB
Flew off the edge and blocked a field-goal attempt in the practice at Lambeau Field. It was the first of a series of flash plays by the rookie free agent when the lights were on. He’s undersized (5-10½, 190) but has the confidence to press regardless of the opponent because of that 4.39 catch-up speed.
“Flew off the edge”, “Flash” Player, “Confident”, “Fast”…..hmmm No mention of green or raw, eh Bob?

It's clear you thought this was a deep position group before the season Bob. Now they're nothing but a bunch of soft basketball players and failed wide receivers that any GM worth anything should have known better than to keep on the roster together. That's honest Bob.

[vince]

On Sept. 7, a few days after the final roster reduction, the New England Patriots .. agreed on a trade in which Rowe went to New England for a conditional fourth-round pick in 2018 that could improve to a third based on performance/playing time clauses.
That trade shoulda been a no-brainer going into the season with what you described as a deep, talented and productive cornerback crew eh Bob? I missed your article at the beginning of the year criticizing Thompson for not making the no-brainer trade for the Philly castoff who struggled against both strength and speed Bob.


Eric Rowe can't play...He doesn't have the foot quickness to stay with NFL WRs
— Brian Baldinger (@BaldyNFL) November 26, 2015

Oh, HERE are the no-brainer veteran CB’s you say he should have picked up off the street….


Antonio Cromartie, a four-time Pro Bowl player, was cut Oct. 4 by the Colts. At 32, Cromartie wasn’t playing well, but at least he had started the first four games.
Not playing well, Ole Cromartie - Tackle a guy? Hell no! That dude's big now!"

https://youtu.be/L8dtySlji1A?t=25s

Team Cancer, Anti-American, Racist (https://bluelivesmatter.blue/antonio-cromartie-fired-colts/), Prolific Womanizer and Child Neglector (http://nypost.com/2016/01/17/antonio-cromartie-pays-336k-every-year-to-support-8-kids/), Self-Admitted Substance Abuse Policy Violator (http://nypost.com/2014/02/05/cromartie-says-nfl-should-allow-weed-were-going-to-do-it-anyway/)


On Sunday, Colts cornerback Antonio Cromartie made the most unpatriotic decision of his career, in front of an international audience in London Cromartie took a knee during the U.S. national anthem and displayed a “black power” fist. As the anthem ended and “God Save The Queen,” the UK’s traditional patriotic song started, he regained his feet and stood for the duration of the song.


Before settling down with Terricka, an ex-model who co-starred in the 2009 E! reality show “Candy Girls,” Cromartie seduced, impregnated and dumped a string of women across the country, from his high school sweetheart in Tallahassee, Fla., to a corporate lawyer and former Miss Black North Carolina.

Several of the women have taken him to court over custody and financial disputes. A Houston woman who bore two of Cromartie’s daughters has demanded a bigger monthly payment.

And several baby mamas say Cromartie spends little time with his far-flung brood.

“These kids have to Google to find out about their dad,” one told The Post.


“They need to just let it go,” Cromartie told thisis50.com — a website affiliated with the rapper 50 Cent. “We’re just going to do it anyway. They just need to let it go. They need to go ahead and say, ‘Ya’ll go ahead, smoke it, do what you need to do.’ ”

Cromartie’s a no-brainer eh Bob, but here’s what you had to say about another guy with a checkered past who never actually played a real game for the Packers…

Bob McGinn ✔ @BobMcGinn
Rest assured 31 other NFL teams raised eyebrows and wondered about leadership/direction in Green Bay after the signing of TE Lyerla.
8:12 AM - 20 May 2014
Almost every franchise has been in the gutter before. Win at all costs defines NFL just like it defined #Packers Mon. So risky. Just say no.

And what did you say to Ted about signing another vet FA with some issues Bob? (http://www.packerwire.net/read.php?2,94318)

Q.You signed Koren Robinson and linebacker Rory Johnson this spring. Some GMs say they would never add players with such well-documented problems with drugs and alcohol. Isn't character as important to you as it appears to be to some others?
What about you Bob? Does character matter, or does depend entirely on which side of the argument you need to be on to criticize Thompson like the hypocritical, dishonest hack of a journalist you demonstrate yourself to be with such regularity?

And here's the other no-brainer vet FA available off the street eh Bob?


Perrish Cox, 29, started nine of 11 games for the Titans before being released Nov. 29. He struggled against the Packers on Nov. 13. His résumé included 45 starts and a checkered off-the-field record.
4.6 as a youngster, now 30 and cut by the 30th ranked Titans pass defense in favor of practice squad corner Kalan Reed. AND a "checkered" past. Yup got it Bob.


Give defensive coordinator Dom Capers and Joe Whitt, the veteran cornerbacks coach, a week with both Cromartie and Cox in a fresh environment for a Super Bowl-contending team and there’s a reasonable chance Matt Ryan wouldn’t have thrown for 371 yards in the first three quarters.

Sure Bob. That’s why they can’t play for 2 of the other worst pass defenses in the league and are known me-first lockerroom cancers who can no longer cover or tackle to boot.


“But that’s their (the Packers’) philosophy, and it’s worked for them because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback.”
OK. Everything would be identical if Ted wouldn’t have had the vision and gonads to draft Rodgers. If I didn’t know better I’d say that’s a very dumb argument, but you're not dumb Bob - just a journalistic hack who disregards truth for profit.


It should be remembered, too, that cash wasn’t always so plentiful in Green Bay. When Wolf, coach Mike Holmgren and Packers President Bob Harlan won their Super Bowl, Lambeau Field wasn’t the cash cow that it is today.

Those Packers persevered through Wolf’s pragmatic approach and ever-bold roster-building practices, Holmgren’s keen intelligence and cutting-edge offensive mind and Harlan’s courage to break from the Lombardi organizational structure and rare gifts in public relations.

When’s the last time cash flow limitations ever crossed the lips of a Packers executive? It’s an issue in some cities but not Green Bay.
Unlimited funds Bob. Right. Never mind the salary cap. Money is no issue whatsoever to deal with these days. Really Bob? You’re THAT blatantly dishonest in your unabashed bashing?


It wouldn’t have taken much to put the Packers over the top this season.
Hint: maintaining status quo isn’t the way to the Super Bowl.
Good one Bob. Stir up the knuckle-draggers. Ted just wants to maintain the status quo. Right. He hated signing Cook last year. He’d rather do nothing and keep everything the same. There’s an honest argument.

But who cares? It’s what pays the bills right Bob?

[vince]

McGinn always gets slammed because he writes for JS
All the Packer reporters feel like the above; they get interviewed weekly on ESPN 1070 on early morning shows and their views reflect the same.
McGinn gets slammed because he's a pot-stirring, dishonest hack with no integrity. He likes to say people don't "like" him because he's an unbiased journalist who doesn't automatically stump for the Packers. I don't hate him at all - but I have zero respect for him as an "unbiased" journalist.

[texaspackerbacker]

I used to hate McGinn for what he wrote a long time ago - seemingly always a "grass is greener somewhere else" kind of guy. This article, though, is mostly just a bunch of facts laid out that we can interpret for ourselves. The bottom line IMO in just about all these cases mentioned is that the guaranteed cost was very very low - the exception being Forte, but we didn't really need him anyway. Ted coulda just signed several of these guys, and if they turned out to be lemons or over the hill, cut 'em quick - but instead, he did what he almost always does - NOTHING.

I used to have a theory that when Ted came to Green Bay, his purpose and goal was to intentionally let the team wind down and deteriorate for whatever reason - maybe so the fan base would erode and the team would move out of such a small market. I figured he got foiled in that by accidentally drafting the greatest QB/player in the NFL, maybe ever. I know that's a little conspiratorial, but it's what occurred to me. If it wasn't that, then he was just plain incompetent. Anyway, the team has gone on and on and on with good - but not great - success. I can't help thinking that level of success would have been much higher if Ted - or somebody else - had just maximized things or at least made a few strategic moves to upgrade things. It wouldn't even need to be high priced free agents - just a better job of drafting and/or a few signings as needed like that article suggests.

[vince]

This article, though, is mostly just a bunch of facts laid out that we can interpret for ourselves.
...
I used to have a theory that when Ted came to Green Bay, his purpose and goal was to intentionally let the team wind down and deteriorate for whatever reason - maybe so the fan base would erode and the team would move out of such a small market. I figured he got foiled in that by accidentally drafting the greatest QB/player in the NFL, maybe ever. I know that's a little conspiratorial, but it's what occurred to me. If it wasn't that, then he was just plain incompetent. Anyway, the team has gone on and on and on with good - but not great - success. I can't help thinking that level of success would have been much higher if Ted - or somebody else - had just maximized things or at least made a few strategic moves to upgrade things. It wouldn't even need to be high priced free agents - just a better job of drafting and/or a few signings as needed like that article suggests.
Did you read the article Tex? Not facts and not truth.

To suggest that Thompson was negligent by not trading for Rowe at the end of camp when everyone - including McGinn - said the Packers cornerback crew was deep, talented and full of promise - is simply not an honest, factual argument.

To suggest that Thompson was negligent for not signing two over-the-hill, me-first, character problems - after criticizing Thompson as a "win at all costs" GM in the "gutter" for previously signing two talented players not over the hill - one of which was quickly removed from the team and the other successfully battled his alcoholism by all accounts during his time with the team - is not an honest, factual argument.

To suggest that Thompson is negligent for not signing vet FA's (which he does of course) because in part the Packers enjoy "unlimited" resources to do so is not an honest, factual argument.

To suggest that Thompson is negligent for not signing a bunch of vet FA's on the offense and defensive front when it couldn't be any more clear - as McGinn goes on to argue from the other side of his mouth - that it was the defensive cornerback depletion that proved to be their undoing in the NFC Championship game - is not just not an honest, factual argument but a foolish one to boot.

I'll leave your conspiracy theory and incompetence argument to drown themselves against the most successful decade of football in the NFC and the second most successful reign in the league. I know, take away Rodgers and the team would suck. Right.

[pbmax]

Are there any mentions of Free Agency failure in the article?

No?

Well, then not really worth reading. If you cherry pick all the best moves of the Super Bowl contenders each year, you would have a whale of a confusing and impossible to duplicate template.

[vince]

Are there any mentions of Free Agency failure in the article?

No?

Well, then not really worth reading. If you cherry pick all the best moves of the Super Bowl contenders each year, you would have a whale of a confusing and impossible to duplicate template.
The moves he did pick were all bad - except for Rowe who's limited at corner but - in retrospect - worth a 4th rounder and a roster spot over Hawkins I'd say.

Of course the Packers had a healthy and talented group from top to bottom at that time. I personally heard no peep from anyone at that time about needing to add a slow-footed big corner who may yet end up at safety.

[RashanGary]

Are there any mentions of Free Agency failure in the article?

No?

Well, then not really worth reading. If you cherry pick all the best moves of the Super Bowl contenders each year, you would have a whale of a confusing and impossible to duplicate template.

This is exactly it. If the Packers won, they have Julius peppers and just signed Jared cook for 2.5m. They would be proof that sb winners, while mostly built through the draft, also need free agents from time to time.

Just like hoodie and Brady's 10 year drought, the Packers are in it and will soon win it. Pay no attention to the troll who writes whichever way the emotional fan base wind blows.

[Maxie the Taxi]

You know, I don't want to argue about it because it's totally a subjective evaluation, but personally I don't look at the Green Bay Packers over the last decade and think "Success!"

"Success!" to me means appearing in a Super Bowl and winning it. As far as I'm concerned, the "Success!" rate of the Packers over the past 10 years is 10%. That's almost as bad as the Brewers or the Bucks.

Yeah, it's nice the Packers are in the playoffs every season. I enjoy the extra games watching my favorite team. But when they fail to get to the big game, it's a severe disappointment, amplified by the horrible way in which they almost invariably lose.

This year I take no satisfaction in the Packers' playoff performances. Yeah, I admired our team's "backs against the wall" effort, but after all is said and done, I'd feel better now if they had gone 4-12 because they'd have a chance to draft some first flight players and nothing would be off the table to turn things around. They'd be "all in" to fix what ails them...

And what ails them is not making it to the Super Bowl.

As things stand now the Powers That Be can sit around and pat themselves on the back over their "Success!ful" season. Now they can blame their failure on a run of bad injury luck and they can plan on doing the same old thing over again next season and we can expect the same result.

I know teams can't win the Super Bowl every year. I know that's an unrealistically high standard. I know the Packers have been the second best team over the last decade.

I don't care. I don't want to settle for 2nd best.

But that's just me and I won't change my mind. If that makes me a knuckle-dragger, so be it.

That's why I won't argue about it.

[vince]

As long as you can admit you have unrealistically high expectations and are OK taking no satisfaction from the journey then there's nothing to argue about Maxie! jk

I'm obviously a lot different. I take great joy in the ride, as well as in being intellectually realistic about what's happening and growing from the experiences and lessons gained by all the successes and failures along the way.

This might be a bit off topic Maxie but I think it's relevant for many - and I don't want to sound demeaning to anyone (which I acknowledge not being very good at) but I think it's important not to attach one's own or others' self-image to a football team.

A lot of people say or believe, "If you're happy with 2nd place then you're a loser!" - as if the success of a football team says something about their success and character as a person. So some people are offput by "homers" who are optimistic even during challenging times, because they feel they settle for average which makes them losers personally. At the same time, others are offput by "haters" who are seemingly always complaining - even in the face of winning, which takes away some of the positive enjoyment of the journey - which makes them losers personally.

In the end it's a sport man - a great one, and we can't control it - so we shouldn't let it control us. I guess that's what fans do though, and the bigger the game, the more control we seem to give it, and the more susceptible our egos become to it.

If I'm honest I'd say I enjoy a good argument, which makes me argumentative, but I enjoy the ride no matter what and always try to be what I think is realistic in analyzing circumstances. In my opinion, there are many successes and failures throughout every season, and they're all part of the great ride. And while I think it's unfair to criticize other people based on unrealistic expectations, I'll try my best not to project personal criticism and animosity along with my opinions - although I'm a flawed individual so keep your expectations low my friend.:glug:

[texaspackerbacker]

Did you read the article Tex? Not facts and not truth.

To suggest that Thompson was negligent by not trading for Rowe at the end of camp when everyone - including McGinn - said the Packers cornerback crew was deep, talented and full of promise - is simply not an honest, factual argument.

To suggest that Thompson was negligent for not signing two over-the-hill, me-first, character problems - after criticizing Thompson as a "win at all costs" GM in the "gutter" for previously signing two talented players not over the hill - one of which was quickly removed from the team and the other successfully battled his alcoholism by all accounts during his time with the team - is not an honest, factual argument.

To suggest that Thompson is negligent for not signing vet FA's (which he does of course) because in part the Packers enjoy "unlimited" resources to do so is not an honest, factual argument.

To suggest that Thompson is negligent for not signing a bunch of vet FA's on the offense and defensive front when it couldn't be any more clear - as McGinn goes on to argue from the other side of his mouth - that it was the defensive cornerback depletion that proved to be their undoing in the NFC Championship game - is not just not an honest, factual argument but a foolish one to boot.

I'll leave your conspiracy theory and incompetence argument to drown themselves against the most successful decade of football in the NFC and the second most successful reign in the league. I know, take away Rodgers and the team would suck. Right.

All of those "suggestions" were your interpretation - he just detailed what did or didn't happen. And emphatically YES, take away Aaron Rodgers, and the past decade of Packer football would have sucked big time - thanks to Ted. The most important point, I say again, is that almost all of those guys would have been dirt cheap and easy to get rid of if they didn't show some value real quick.

[texaspackerbacker]

You know, I don't want to argue about it because it's totally a subjective evaluation, but personally I don't look at the Green Bay Packers over the last decade and think "Success!"

"Success!" to me means appearing in a Super Bowl and winning it. As far as I'm concerned, the "Success!" rate of the Packers over the past 10 years is 10%. That's almost as bad as the Brewers or the Bucks.

Yeah, it's nice the Packers are in the playoffs every season. I enjoy the extra games watching my favorite team. But when they fail to get to the big game, it's a severe disappointment, amplified by the horrible way in which they almost invariably lose.

This year I take no satisfaction in the Packers' playoff performances. Yeah, I admired our team's "backs against the wall" effort, but after all is said and done, I'd feel better now if they had gone 4-12 because they'd have a chance to draft some first flight players and nothing would be off the table to turn things around. They'd be "all in" to fix what ails them...

And what ails them is not making it to the Super Bowl.

As things stand now the Powers That Be can sit around and pat themselves on the back over their "Success!ful" season. Now they can blame their failure on a run of bad injury luck and they can plan on doing the same old thing over again next season and we can expect the same result.

I know teams can't win the Super Bowl every year. I know that's an unrealistically high standard. I know the Packers have been the second best team over the last decade.

I don't care. I don't want to settle for 2nd best.

But that's just me and I won't change my mind. If that makes me a knuckle-dragger, so be it.

That's why I won't argue about it.

I completely agree about the "Success!" - that's why it conflicts me to rag on Ted for not maximizing things. I say that as somebody who values winning so much in the regular season at least as much as the playoffs and Super Bowl. And when you make the Bucks and Brewers comparison, it's even more obvious.

But it is what it is with Ted Thompson, and I can't help thinking what it could be/SHOULD BE with Aaron Rodgers.

[vince]

All of those "suggestions" were your interpretation - he just detailed what did or didn't happen. And emphatically YES, take away Aaron Rodgers, and the past decade of Packer football would have sucked big time - thanks to Ted. The most important point, I say again, is that almost all of those guys would have been dirt cheap and easy to get rid of if they didn't show some value real quick.
Tex are you sure you read the article? His characterization of Thompson, supported by the series of what can only be described as either dishonest and hypocritical or utterly foolish arguments (I think we all know McGinn's not foolish.) is clear and scathing.

McGinn does more than detail facts. All of these accusations and assessments are either gross exaggerations to the point of ridiculousness or flat out untrue assertions intended to provoke a reaction - and I have no doubt McGinn knows that.

Pot Stirring Drama to the Extreme
"How can he look the coaches in the face?" "Ted loves to sit on his hands." "He's not even trying to get better." "He's burying his head in the sand." "It must be so depressing to know nothing will change." "He just wants the status quo."

There is no truth in any of that provocative drama. The fact that the highly successful and experienced GM disagrees with McGinn's ex post facto assertions about how any competent GM would have acted doesn't make McGinn correct. And Ole Cromartie is the best he can come up with in his attempts to delegitimize Thompson?

To make it the character assassination/incompetence piece more ethically disturbing, McGinn criticizes Thompson for taking the franchise into the "gutter" and selling out his character standards on one hand, then turns around and criticizes Thompson for not signing 2 guys with major character concerns. That's the definition of hypocrisy. He has no standards of journalistic integrity whatsoever when it comes to his ongoing anti-Thompson smear campaign.

It goes on and on. You can hang on to your incompetency opinion until you're blue in the face but you're ignoring the reality of what McGinn's doing in this propaganda piece. And the unrealistic Ted bashing crew are all too happy to gobble the nonsense and double-standards right up.

[texaspackerbacker]

I reread the article, and I still say virtually all of it is a recitation of things that happened or didn't happen. Yeah, there was a small amount of editorial exaggeration, and yeah, he's trying to stir the pot - probably because that's what people like him do to stimulate reader interest. I really hate defending McGinn, who as I said, I've never liked, but did you see ANY untrue statements? I sure didn't. Or any not defensible lines? Your "Pot Stirring" paragraph above all rings true with me. And I still have this nagging thought that maybe it AIN'T incompetence, but rather some hidden agenda for the way he runs things - maybe not dragging the team down like I said I used to believe, but more like cheapness - putting corporate profit ahead of fielding the best possible team.

[vince]

If your only definition of success is championships, I'd guess they're pretty meaningful... You say the Packers are almost as bad as the Bucks and Brewers, and Tex says the comparison is obvious. Failure all around.

Milwaukee Brewers - 47 years, 0 Championships, 0 since 2005
Milwaukee Bucks - 49 years, 1 Championship, 0 since 2005
Green Bay Packers - 96 years, 13 Championships, 1 since 2005

1 championship in the last 11 years is infinitely greater than nearly 50 years of almost complete disappointment. 1971 was an awfully long time ago to have any satisfaction. 46 years. Damn.

Green Bay has another 40 years to go. You won't have to wait nearly that long to get rid of Thompson so take heart.

[vince]

I reread the article, and I still say virtually all of it is a recitation of things that happened or didn't happen. Yeah, there was a small amount of editorial exaggeration, and yeah, he's trying to stir the pot - probably because that's what people like him do to stimulate reader interest. I really hate defending McGinn, who as I said, I've never liked, but did you see ANY untrue statements? I sure didn't. Or any not defensible lines? Your "Pot Stirring" paragraph above all rings true with me. And I still have this nagging thought that maybe it AIN'T incompetence, but rather some hidden agenda for the way he runs things - maybe not dragging the team down like I said I used to believe, but more like cheapness - putting corporate profit ahead of fielding the best possible team.
Carry on Tex. McGinn actually laid the truth right out for you. Ted doesn't even want to win. Never has but it's not a conspiracy per se. He just wants the status quo so he does't have to sign any free agents. He hates those guys - with a passion, and he's deathly afraid of change. It's rare but there's a name for it - Free Agent Metathesiophobia by Proxy - and he hasn't yet recovered from the Cook episode. He probably won't ever recover from that one since we know with certainty that nothing will change ever again as long as Ted remains in charge. That HAS to ring true doesn't it?

[Teamcheez1]

There will be 31 teams at the end of this season eviscerating either/both their coaching staffs and general manager.

I'm not saying there can't be improvements and changes, however only one team will be happy when all is said and done.

[Maxie the Taxi]

In the end it's a sport man - a great one, and we can't control it - so we shouldn't let it control us. I guess that's what fans do though, and the bigger the game, the more control we seem to give it, and the more susceptible our egos become to it.

If I'm honest I'd say I enjoy a good argument...I agree 100%. Fans approach the game from different perspectives and for different reasons and one reason is as good as another. In the end it's only a game. Add all this to the dictum that there is more than one way to skin a cat and you've got the makings of great fun. That's probably why most of us are here. LOL

[esoxx]

There's no reason to start a season with 15 rookies/first year players as the Pack did this year. This is an admission that drafting and developing didn't go so well in recent past. So you have one of the youngest teams in the league again. Then when injuries strike, which they inevitably will in such a violent game, you get these greenhorns out there on the field and it looks like a Chinese fire drill* out there. Especially on defense.

Would like to see them augment the roster with some vets so when the time comes that they're needed, they have an idea where to be and what to do.

*apologies to any Chinese I may have offended in the making of this post.

[texaspackerbacker]

Carry on Tex. McGinn actually laid the truth right out for you. Ted doesn't even want to win. Never has but it's not a conspiracy per se. He just wants the status quo so he does't have to sign any free agents. He hates those guys - with a passion, and he's deathly afraid of change. It's rare but there's a name for it - Free Agent Metathesiophobia by Proxy - and he hasn't yet recovered from the Cook episode. He probably won't ever recover from that one since we know with certainty that nothing will change ever again as long as Ted remains in charge. That HAS to ring true doesn't it?

Actually, yes hahahaha.

[texaspackerbacker]

There will be 31 teams at the end of this season eviscerating either/both their coaching staffs and general manager.

I'm not saying there can't be improvements and changes, however only one team will be happy when all is said and done.

Yes, but 30 other teams will not end up losing while possessing the greatest QB in the history of the world.

[texaspackerbacker]

If your only definition of success is championships, I'd guess they're pretty meaningful... You say the Packers are almost as bad as the Bucks and Brewers, and Tex says the comparison is obvious. Failure all around.

Milwaukee Brewers - 47 years, 0 Championships, 0 since 2005
Milwaukee Bucks - 49 years, 1 Championship, 0 since 2005
Green Bay Packers - 96 years, 13 Championships, 1 since 2005

1 championship in the last 11 years is infinitely greater than nearly 50 years of almost complete disappointment. 1971 was an awfully long time ago to have any satisfaction. 46 years. Damn.

Green Bay has another 40 years to go. You won't have to wait nearly that long to get rid of Thompson so take heart.

Thanks for laying out those facts for us all hahahahaha. My point that the Packers have been a lot better than the Bucks or Brewers - over the last 20 or 25 years anyway. Go back a little farther than that, and you have some decent Bucks years and even a few good Brewers seasons in the midst of the long Packer period of crap between Lombardi and Holmgren. And you're right, it ain't all championships. Not winning it all while having Aaron Rodgers, though, is akin to not winning the NBA when the Bucks had Kareem/Alcindor. The Bucks at least had the excuse of conspiratorial bad officiating, though.

Maxie, you do realize, Vince (Lombardi, not our poster here) is turning over in his grave reading what you said about only a game, etc. That's true, to some extent, but I can remember back to my college days (the Lombardi era) if the Packers lost, it seemed like the whole state of Wisconsin was in a funk until the following Sunday.

[Carolina_Packer]

There's no reason to start a season with 15 rookies/first year players as the Pack did this year. This is an admission that drafting and developing didn't go so well in recent past. So you have one of the youngest teams in the league again. Then when injuries strike, which they inevitably will in such a violent game, you get these greenhorns out there on the field and it looks like a Chinese fire drill* out there. Especially on defense.

Would like to see them augment the roster with some vets so when the time comes that they're needed, they have an idea where to be and what to do.

*apologies to any Chinese I may have offended in the making of this post.

Re-sign Casey Hayward and outbid the Bears for Brandon Boykin and you've got some nice depth at corner, instead of being left with greenhorns for depth when the injuries mounted. Even though not out for the season, you can't tell me that Randall and Rollins didn't have their play affected by injury. Hayward was an interesting non-signing. Perhaps Ted and Co. were a bit over-confident in what they had. Even healthy, I think they still would have struggled. Look at the guys who were available during last off-season's free agency.

Look, I'm not talking about signing guys during the season to plug holes. I'm talking about giving serious consideration to who is available at the start of free agency and getting them in ASAP for the off-season program. Casey Hayward and Brandon Boykin could have been difference makers, the Packers could have fit them under the cap, and so sorry Josh Hawkins and Makinton Dorleant. We like your talent, we just need some guys who have some experience.

I agree that TT should roll the dice on free agency more, but not after all the guys are hurt, but when we need to start building the team from the start of the off-season. You don't have to give up a lot of guaranteed money to get back some good, experienced talent that don't need a ton of hand-holding, like our cornerback depth does.

[vince]

There's no reason to start a season with 15 rookies/first year players as the Pack did this year. This is an admission that drafting and developing didn't go so well in recent past. So you have one of the youngest teams in the league again. Then when injuries strike, which they inevitably will in such a violent game, you get these greenhorns out there on the field and it looks like a Chinese fire drill* out there. Especially on defense.

Would like to see them augment the roster with some vets so when the time comes that they're needed, they have an idea where to be and what to do.

*apologies to any Chinese I may have offended in the making of this post.
Other than a handful of busted plays by Spriggs, the one muffed punt by Davis, and Hawkins getting beat one time early on (the lone Chinese fire drill perhaps), the rookies and first-year players that saw the field did OK for themselves.

There were valuable contributions from Allison, Brice, Clark, Lowry, Martinez, and Spriggs (at times).

81 Allison, Geronimo WR 6-3 202 23 R Illinois
29 Brice, Kentrell S 5-11 200 22 R Louisiana Tech
6 Callahan, Joe QB 6-1 216 23 R Wesley
97 Clark, Kenny DT 6-3 314 21 R UCLA
11 Davis, Trevor WR 6-1 188 23 R California
25 Evans, Marwin S 5-11 211 23 R Utah State
51 Fackrell, Kyler LB 6-5 245 25 R Utah State
57 Flores, Jacob C 6-3 300 23 R Dartmouth
93 Gilbert, Reggie LB 6-3 261 23 R Arizona
19 Goodley, Antwan WR 5-10 212 25 1 Baylor
28 Hawkins, Josh CB 5-10 189 24 R East Carolina
40 Kerridge, Joe FB 6-0 245 24 R Michigan
94 Lowry, Dean DE 6-6 296 22 R Northwestern
50 Martinez, Blake LB 6-2 237 23 R Stanford
49 Mathews, Derrick LB 6-0 232 24 1 Houston
13 McCaffrey, Max WR 6-2 200 22 R Duke
68 Murphy, Kyle T 6-6 305 23 R Stanford
62 Patrick, Lucas G 6-3 313 23 R Duke
Pepper, Taybor LS 6-4 245 22 R Michigan State
96 Price, Brian DT 6-3 318 22 R Texas-San Antonio
99 Ringo, Christian DT 6-1 298 24 1 Louisiana-Lafayette
85 Sandland, Beau TE 6-5 252 23 R Montana State
78 Spriggs, Jason T 6-6 301 22 R Indiana
26 Waters, Herb CB 6-0 188 24 R Miami
35 Whitehead, Jermaine S 5-11 195 23 1 Auburn

These guys consistently kicked the crap out of the opposition's developmental guys all preseason long. At times they competed strong against first/second teamers.

[vince]

A lot of people are criticizing Thompson for not using free agency more to this point, and others of us are anticipating a critical need at the #1 corner position, which could potentially be filled in free agency this year.

With the input of Bill Polian, Howie Roseman, and others, here is a pretty strong cautionary list of the
Six Modern-Day Commandments of NFL Free Agency (http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2015/3/9/8131957/cowboys-2015-free-agency-primer-the-six-fa-commandments)

Violation of these commandments may be forgiven (with penance), but sinning is not to be taken lightly. Habitual sinners can find themselves suffering an eternity in hell.

1. Thou Shalt Wait for the Storm to Passeth

Every year, the first week of free agency brings a feeding (and paying) frenzy, in which the "top names" are hurriedly signed to top-dollar deals. Think about the first-week, big-money free agent signings of the past few offseasons, in which teams eager to improve their rosters convince themselves that they simply must get a certain player or players and, as a result, get caught up in a bidding war for their services. This is the epitome of short-view thinking and, almost invariably, they overpay because of it.

Think about it: when was the last time the Patriots, Steelers, Colts, or Packers jumped into the first-week overpaying frenzy? They haven't, because they are patient, stable, rational organizations.

2. Thou Shalt Avert Thy Gaze From the Heavens

Bill Polian offered a list of free agency do's and don'ts. Number five on his list? "realize that you are never one player away from a championship." O.C.C. agrees; he writes, "Don't ever think that you're just one or two players away, because no team ever is, especially not in this era of the NFL." With parity and the number of injuries every year, no team is ever a single player away.

Since teams learned how to manage the free agency, salary cap controlled NFL landscape, almost nobody fails to keep the players that they want to retain. Thus, the guys who are on the market are there because their old teams, who know them best, didn't want them.

And this is the rub: free agents' former teams know much, much more about them than the teams that acquires their services...and have decided to let them go. If a guy was a star in the clubhouse and on the field, you can rest assured that he wouldn't be available. But every year, at free agent time, teams forget this - and overpay for the promise of a salvation that never comes.

3. Thou Shalt Forsake the Aged

A cardinal rule--perhaps the cardinal rule--of managing the salary cap is to avoid giving multi-year contracts with guaranteed money to players - notably excepting franchise caliber quarterbacks - 30 years of age or older. The key is to avoid offering third contracts, which tend to be signed by players who are in the 28-30-year-old range. Indeed, in his insider piece, Polian says that teams mustn't "give a four-year or longer contract, even to an A [level] player, who is 28 years of age or older."

4. Thou Shalt Take Care of Thine Own Sons

Closely related to the above commandment is this: good teams draft well, coach up their players and offer certain core guys reasonable second contracts before they hit free agency.
This is good business. On many levels, it's smarter to reward the guys other players see working their tails off on the practice field and film room than to spend big bucks on "independent contractors," the equivalent of football mercenaries. As Roseman notes:
When you bring in guys that maybe are good players but not great and pay them great player money, what does that say to the rest of your team? What does that say to the guys that you drafted and brought in here...what kind of message does that send?
The short answer: not a very good one. Rather than gambling on players your rivals decided they didn't want after scouting, drafting and paying them, and in spending thousands of hours in developing and honing their skill sets, its always best to keep the guys you have brought into your program and developed.

5. Thou Shalt Not Covet Thy Neighbor's Mediocrities

The vast majority of available free agents every season are Larry Browns: serviceable vets, many of whom were cogs in a well-oiled machine – but not your machine. Plus the fact that some of them happen to play for elite teams raises their value far beyond their ability. The schemes and systems vary more from club to club, and one’s playing style must mesh with that of those around him. For stars, this isn’t a problem. But for flawed players, it can be. The flaws can be difficult to spot, as things like character and injuries are hard to grasp by those who are not inside the building or around the player every day.
“For the players allowed to hit free agency, the flaws are generally worse than people realize. The system is designed to have you make mistakes,” cautioned Polian. Mid-tier players always have flags, often many.
Durability Flag
Contract Year Flag
Character Flag
Role Flag
Inconsistency/In-Decline Flag
Overpriced Flag

6. Thou Shalt Not Atone For Past Sins With Further Sinning

This is the free agent vortex in which many teams become trapped: making up for draft failings by filling holes via big-ticket free agency signings. The key to this final tenet is, of course, that a team must draft well, so that they can replace veterans with youngsters who can actually play.

[run pMc]

I think McGinn's game analyses and his draft coverage are often very good; I think his opinion pieces are garbage. This one is the latter.
Eagles fans were howling at the time of the trade; how could they give Rowe away? The answer was they had him at about #5 on their DB depth chart coming out of camp. My guess is TT was interested but the asking price was too much and the Pats got lucky rolling the dice.
I also don't think the way the Packers played in the NFCC would have changed much by 1 or 2 players like Rowe; the whole team played flat and made a lot of mistakes. They would have needed an in-prime Charles Woodson and the ghost of Reggie White to win.

[pbmax]

The exception to #3 is Quarterback. Scarcity is a heck of a thing.

[vince]

Great point. Significant exception to that commandment. An amendment should be etched.

I'd say that #3, when combined with adherence to #4, may be the most readily forgiven commandment. Teams have a far stronger sense of the likely physical durability and can more accurately gauge the productive life of their own players than those from outside the organization.

[Pugger]

I found his railing on Ted about the cornerback position equivocal too. Nobody at the end of TC was concerned about that position at all. If anybody talked about it they talked about how deep it was! After things went south the ONLY way we were gonna improve that spot was via a trade and in-season trades in the NFL are about as rare as hen's teeth.

[woodbuck27]

There's no reason to start a season with 15 rookies/first year players as the Pack did this year. This is an admission that drafting and developing didn't go so well in recent past. So you have one of the youngest teams in the league again. Then when injuries strike, which they inevitably will in such a violent game, you get these greenhorns out there on the field and it looks like a Chinese fire drill* out there. Especially on defense.

Would like to see them augment the roster with some vets so when the time comes that they're needed, they have an idea where to be and what to do.

*apologies to any Chinese I may have offended in the making of this post.

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/fJOgFbPrMlU/hqdefault.jpg

Fire ! Fire !! Fire !!!

Fire em all !!!

[vince]

Bob McGinn (http://www.packersnews.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/mcginn/2016/11/05/mcginn-packers-must-held-high-standard/93291052/) has no use for today's wisdom and practical experience about the realities of the modern mature free agent marketplace.

I almost puked as I read this in disbelief, but I have seen the light.

Some readers never have and never will approve of my approach, which is fine. It took me years to discover what it took to win, and I have thanked Wolf, Holmgren and Harlan personally for showing me the way.

Wolf, Holmgren and Harlan taught him all there is to know for all time. And he will make Thompson continue to pay the price for not heeding or even adequately respecting his timeless mastery of what it really takes to win.

Perhaps some day Bob - we can only hope - Ted will finally come to understand and appreciate the depth of your ignorance and arrogance - I mean your masterful knowledge of the timeless intricacies of winning. Make ridiculous stuff up, be a hypocritical hack, misrepresent his motives, your knowledge, whatever it takes - but thank you Bob for carrying the torch of goodness for us regular folks in spite of our ignorance. Thank you for holding our beloved Packers to the highest standards of your definitive wisdom of THE WAY to achieve true excellence.

What a self-righteous, self-important, elitist twit. It seemingly never even occurred to him that what he learned a couple generations ago might be out of touch with new and different realities. Typical of so many journalists I guess.

[RashanGary]

Perhaps some day Bob - we can only hope - Ted will finally come to understand and appreciate the depth of your ignorance and arrogance - I mean your masterful knowledge about the timeless intricacies of winning.

What a self-righteous, self-important, elitist twit. Typical of so many journalists I guess.


That is what it is. He's cocky and thinks he knows better. It seeps out of him. I'd love to punch him in the face.

But on another note, it will feel great to see GB shove it up his ass and win another SB with Ted!

Bob is very hard working and detailed with his data collection and tedious, mindless labor. Take him away from mindless work and ask him to think and the dip shit shines through.

[esoxx]

That is what it is. He's cocky and thinks he knows better. It seeps out of him. I'd love to punch him in the face.

But on another note, it will feel great to see GB shove it up his ass and win another SB with Ted!

Bob is very hard working and detailed with his data collection and tedious, mindless labor. Take him away from mindless work and ask him to think and the dip shit shines through.

Haha look at this guy. He'd love to punch a 60 some year old man in the face. What a dumb fuck. Aren't you the guy always lecturing how you need to grow from your mistakes and learn? After all, you've admitted you've had multiple DUI's, banged prostitutes, and contracted various lifelong venereal diseases. Now you're right back to talking out of your ass wanting to punch an old man in the face. What a douche :lol:

[texaspackerbacker]

I have no dispute at all with any of the bad mouthing of McGinn, and homer that I am, I think the Packers certainly ought to win another Super Bowl or more than one. If/when it happens, though, it will be in spite of Ted Thompson, not because of him - except for the great decision of taking Aaron Rodgers of course.

[pbmax]

Is this what it was like to read the papers in the state, after Lombardi, during the 70s and 80s?

Did columnists wrap themselves in Lombardi while defending Judge Parins? Insist that Lombardi had shown them the way to win and deviation was heresy? The coach and GM must be one?

Someone should ask Bob if he is headed to San Fran to teach John Lynch what he has learned.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E57W4PZ94i4

[bobblehead]

I know the article will get shredded; it's a good read with some good points

http://www.jsonline.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/mcginn/2017/01/28/mcginn-ted-thompsons-formula-success-fizzles/97136720/

Completely ignores the fact that the Peppers signing was akin to the woodson signing.

[Rutnstrut]

Time will tell. McGinn was talking shit like this before the Packers won the SB. Then before the season starts he says they look like SB contenders. Then when the season ends he cherry picks tidbits to write a piece like this. He doesn't know what he's talking about. He just writes whichever way the wind is blowing.

The hoody didn't win a sb for 10-12 years whatever it was between 2003 or 2004, whenever it was till 2014. Just like the pAts, the Packers are in it every year. We're gonna win another.

Your argument about Hoodie is invalid. This will be Tom Brady's 7th SB. Rodgers will be extremely lucky to play in another ONE if there aren't some big changes in GB. Mainly TT has to go. He as gotten lucky with one pick, that's it. Without Rodgers TT, and stubby wouldn't even be mediocre. It's time to reward AR for continually saving their ass.

[Rutnstrut]

Completely ignores the fact that the Peppers signing was akin to the woodson signing.

Not even close, Peppers did not contribute a fraction of what Woodson did to this team.

[RashanGary]

Your argument about Hoodie is invalid.

It's completely valid. Bb and tb went 10 years without winning a sb. Best coach/qb maybe of all time.

[Zool]

So other than the Patriots, who would you say has met or exceeded the Packers' success over the last 13 years?

Also, Dan fucking Marino went to one Super Bowl and actually had 4-5 straight seasons of sub .500 records (not fact checked). Stop saying that a QB automatically means you get to win the Super Bowl. It's stupid and makes you look stupid.

[th87]

It's completely valid. Bb and tb went 10 years without winning a sb. Best coach/qb maybe of all time.

The Patriots had already won 3 SBs in 4 years prior to the "drought". That itself should invalidate any Patriots/Packers comparison. But even if we just forget that fact:

During the 10 year drought, the Patriots at worst reached their conference championship 5 times. They were thwarted from SB victories by a miraculous helmet catch and a Welker drop.

While the Packers have only gotten two playoff byes in 9 years of Rodgers.

At 20,000 feet away, you can't tell the difference between Angelina Jolie and Lena Dunham either.

[th87]

So other than the Patriots, who would you say has met or exceeded the Packers' success over the last 13 years?

Also, Dan fucking Marino went to one Super Bowl and actually had 4-5 straight seasons of sub .500 records (not fact checked). Stop saying that a QB automatically means you get to win the Super Bowl. It's stupid and makes you look stupid.

Marino is the outlier; he was a victim of terrible team management.

The greats include Montana, Brady, Manning, Marino, and Rodgers. The first three have multiple SB appearances and wins.

The Packers should too.

[th87]

I think McGinn's game analyses and his draft coverage are often very good; I think his opinion pieces are garbage. This one is the latter.
Eagles fans were howling at the time of the trade; how could they give Rowe away? The answer was they had him at about #5 on their DB depth chart coming out of camp. My guess is TT was interested but the asking price was too much and the Pats got lucky rolling the dice.
I also don't think the way the Packers played in the NFCC would have changed much by 1 or 2 players like Rowe; the whole team played flat and made a lot of mistakes. They would have needed an in-prime Charles Woodson and the ghost of Reggie White to win.

Perhaps not, but maybe they win the Redskins and Titans games, and end up with home field advantage.

[vince]

I have no dispute at all with any of the bad mouthing of McGinn, and homer that I am, I think the Packers certainly ought to win another Super Bowl or more than one. If/when it happens, though, it will be in spite of Ted Thompson, not because of him - except for the great decision of taking Aaron Rodgers of course.
Please forgive the nonbelievers among us Great One, for they know not the error of their ways.

May the mysterious virtues of victory be bestowed upon us as we band together, bow to his Greatness and thus call upon him to deliver us from the darkness of tyranny - and through his wisdom, enlighten our path to the promised land.

For thine is the kingdom, the power and the glory of Bob's, now and forever.

[bobblehead]

I'm obviously a lot different. I take great joy in the ride, as well as in being intellectually realistic about what's happening and growing from the experiences and lessons gained by all the successes and failures along the way.


I agree largely. I enjoyed the run. We went from 4-6 to NFCC game. We got beat by a better team this time. When we lost to the seahawks I was miserable. We lost to an inferior team that we beat up and down the field. That was the time to bitch.

Losing Shields was huge. Losing the next 2 sucked ass. If we want to bitch about ted we should keep it to the things that are TRULY being honest. Time to make Clay take a big paycut and stay at ILB.

Also, this would be a good year to grab a FA. Peppers off the books, Shields off the books. Clay takes a cut. We will have money.

[bobblehead]

Wolf, Holmgren and Harlan taught him all there is to know for all time. And he will make Thompson continue to pay the price for not heeding or even adequately respecting his timeless mastery of what it really takes to win.


The true irony is that TT has as many superbowl wins as those 3 guys. I would like to check his overall win % with GB and stack it up with them.

[bobblehead]

During the 10 year drought, the Patriots at worst reached their conference championship 5 times. They were thwarted from SB victories by a miraculous helmet catch and a Welker drop.
.

Sounds like excuses made by losers to me. Like if I were to say that Hyde had a pick go right through his fingers that would have put us in the superbowl instead of SF.

[bobblehead]

Marino is the outlier; he was a victim of terrible team management.

The greats include Montana, Brady, Manning, Marino, and Rodgers. The first three have multiple SB appearances and wins.

The Packers should too.

What about Bradshaw and Staubach? Lets look at the other failure GM's that wasted great QB's. Tarkenton, Kelly, Manning and Elway until the bitter end, Brees, Moon, Fouts, McNabb, and lets not forget...Colts are totally wasting Lucks prime. Its almost as if a great QB doesn't guarantee a superbowl win.

[pbmax]

Wins by a quarterback is a terrible measure for any individual on the team. Wins are a great metric for management and head coaches.

The problem for Ted and Mike is not matching up to the Patriots. Great coach, good GM, great QB. AFC East and AFC in general help them out quite a lot.

The problem for Ted and Mike is that the Seachickens, Steelers and Giants have been there twice. Packers should have joined the group in 2014.

[pbmax]

What about Bradshaw and Staubach? Lets look at the other failure GM's that wasted great QB's. Tarkenton, Kelly, Manning and Elway until the bitter end, Brees, Moon, Fouts, McNabb, and lets not forget...Colts are totally wasting Lucks prime. Its almost as if a great QB doesn't guarantee a superbowl win.

Bradshaw makes a hash about Super Bowl wins making a QB great. He wouldn't be top 10 without 4 super bowl wins, yet two of them were defense and running game.

[pbmax]

Bradshaw makes a hash about Super Bowl wins making a QB great. He wouldn't be top 10 without 4 super bowl wins, yet two of them were defense and running game.

Same with Troy Aikman.

[Tony Oday]

So other than the Patriots, who would you say has met or exceeded the Packers' success over the last 13 years?

Also, Dan fucking Marino went to one Super Bowl and actually had 4-5 straight seasons of sub .500 records (not fact checked). Stop saying that a QB automatically means you get to win the Super Bowl. It's stupid and makes you look stupid.

That was when you could tackle WR during their routes practically. Marino would be devastating in the NFL if he was in his prime now.

[vince]

I agree largely. I enjoyed the run. We went from 4-6 to NFCC game. We got beat by a better team this time. When we lost to the seahawks I was miserable. We lost to an inferior team that we beat up and down the field. That was the time to bitch.

Losing Shields was huge. Losing the next 2 sucked ass. If we want to bitch about ted we should keep it to the things that are TRULY being honest. Time to make Clay take a big paycut and stay at ILB.

Also, this would be a good year to grab a FA. Peppers off the books, Shields off the books. Clay takes a cut. We will have money.
Agree with all of that (mostly). I agree Clay should take a cut but that one's a lot more complex than that. He's (publicly at least) been a consummate team-first guy, and he needs to stay healthy for once.

And while it's by no means absolute, there is equity that can be built - perhaps leveraged in other meaningful ways elsewhere - by upholding the team's commitment to the integrity of the player-organization relationship, particularly when the player has visibly to both teammates and public - upheld it first.

That said, I still would like to see his deal redone somehow - ideally without extending it - because given his injury history, age and explosion-based skillset, he could be a guy that falls quickly. I'm not sure how easy all that will be to deal with, nor am I sure how it can be done without outright pissing Clay off, and possibly undermining the foundation of trust with the entire team.

It should be done from a business perspective but shouldn't be done from a culture perspective.

I also think Clay should move around more than be locked in at either OLB or ILB. He wasn't great in coverage inside, and while he still needs to be accounted for when healthy, his impact is limited going up against opponents' best pass blocker all day long outside.

[Pugger]

I agree largely. I enjoyed the run. We went from 4-6 to NFCC game. We got beat by a better team this time. When we lost to the seahawks I was miserable. We lost to an inferior team that we beat up and down the field. That was the time to bitch.

Losing Shields was huge. Losing the next 2 sucked ass. If we want to bitch about ted we should keep it to the things that are TRULY being honest. Time to make Clay take a big paycut and stay at ILB.

Also, this would be a good year to grab a FA. Peppers off the books, Shields off the books. Clay takes a cut. We will have money.

And this fan base is still not over that loss to Seattle.

[Pugger]

So other than the Patriots, who would you say has met or exceeded the Packers' success over the last 13 years?

Also, Dan fucking Marino went to one Super Bowl and actually had 4-5 straight seasons of sub .500 records (not fact checked). Stop saying that a QB automatically means you get to win the Super Bowl. It's stupid and makes you look stupid.

One team that has been almost as successful as we have been since 2005 is the Steelers. If you read their forums today those fans are not bitching like we are. There are a couple of assistants they have no use for but you don't see posts calling for the heads of their GM and/or HC. They are not pissing and moaning about another "Participation Trophy" even tho their team lost handily to NE in the AFCC game. They basically think their was season successful even tho they came up short of the ultimate prize. I visit other Packers forums and when anyone suggests this was a successful season other posters will rail on them and tell that that person he/she is a delusional homer and an idiot. It seems our fans are upset because we are allowing yet another HOF QB to rot and not win more than one ring.

[Pugger]

The true irony is that TT has as many superbowl wins as those 3 guys. I would like to check his overall win % with GB and stack it up with them.

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/08/nfl-best-teams-most-wins-playoff-appearances-super-bowls-new-england-indianapolis-pittsburgh-which-nfl-team-is-best

[vince]

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/08/nfl-best-teams-most-wins-playoff-appearances-super-bowls-new-england-indianapolis-pittsburgh-which-nfl-team-is-best
Just a note that that list is 4 years old. I'm pretty sure if you slide the 10-year timeline forward to the present that Green Bay rises to #2.

[vince]

Yes I was right.
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/tgl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=career&year_min=2007&year_max=2016&game_type=E&game_num_min=0&game_num_max=99&week_num_min=0&week_num_max=99&temperature_gtlt=lt&team_conf_id=All+Conferences&team_div_id=All+Divisions&opp_conf_id=All+Conferences&opp_div_id=All+Divisions&team_off_scheme=Any+Scheme&team_def_align=Any+Alignment&opp_off_scheme=Any+Scheme&opp_def_align=Any+Alignment&c1stat=choose&c1comp=gt&c2stat=choose&c2comp=gt&c3stat=choose&c3comp=gt&c4stat=choose&c4comp=gt&c5comp=choose&c5gtlt=lt&c6mult=1.0&c6comp=choose&order_by=pass_td

Surprisingly New Orleans is the 2nd winningest NFC team of the last decade, 7th best overall in terms of winning %.

That list includes playoff games as well BTW.

[Pugger]

Just a note that that list is 4 years old. I'm pretty sure if you slide the 10-year timeline forward to the present that Green Bay rises to #2.


I couldn't find a more recent list.

[vince]

Wolf's Winning % from 1991-2001 was .615
Thompson's Winning % from 2005-2016 is .612

I'd argue that you should take any GM's first year out because that not their team but that's arbitrary.

And we get the same results - neck and neck overall and both stellar.
Wolf from 1992-2001 .648
Thompson from 2006-2016 .642

[vince]

* It must also be acknowledged for the sake of truth and justice that The Bob has determined that Wolf's record has defined THE WAY to winning, while Thompson's record is completely in spite of himself.

[pbmax]

Bob also forgets that the new NFL way of doing business, once teams figured out how to avoid constant cap casualties, drove him out of the business.

[vince]

Bob also forgets that the new NFL way of doing business, once teams figured out how to avoid constant cap casualties, drove him out of the business.
Blasphemy. Boldly signing many free agents is THE WAY.

Given Green Bay's virtually unlimited financial resources, continuously signing and dumping players to achieve continous improvement maximizes quality. Anything less just isn't even trying.

Between Mccarthy and Thompson, there's just not enough intelligence in the room.

[th87]

Sounds like excuses made by losers to me. Like if I were to say that Hyde had a pick go right through his fingers that would have put us in the superbowl instead of SF.

Okay, give me five more of those, bookended with 3 SBs in 4 years, and potentially 2 in 3 years, and we might have a comparison.

[Upnorth]

Blasphemy. Boldly signing many free agents is THE WAY.

Given Green Bay's virtually unlimited financial resources, continuously signing and dumping players to achieve continous improvement maximizes quality. Anything less just isn't even trying.

Between Mccarthy and Thompson, there's just not enough intelligence in the room.

Are you trying to 'fritz' free agency?

[th87]

What about Bradshaw and Staubach? Lets look at the other failure GM's that wasted great QB's. Tarkenton, Kelly, Manning and Elway until the bitter end, Brees, Moon, Fouts, McNabb, and lets not forget...Colts are totally wasting Lucks prime. Its almost as if a great QB doesn't guarantee a superbowl win.

Rodgers is better than all of them, besides Manning.

[pbmax]

"From what I'm told," Rapoport said, "I would think the Packers are going to go and get some free agents this year along with trying to re-sign Jared Cook -- which is a priority for them."

Aaron Nagler ‏@AaronNagler Jan 27
Remember this from 2014? Good times.

Ian Rapoport @RapSheet
From Total Access: I’m told #Packers plan to spend money on outside free agents this year with nearly $30M in cap space. Could most in years

[red]

yeah, i've read two reports now that we are going to go spend in free agency

but don't we hear that everytime this year?

hopefully we go out and at least sign one quality vet, i would hope its at CB

[pbmax]

But Ryan Wood says this: http://www.packersnews.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/2017/01/27/mccarthy-no-change-thompsons-vision/97110840/


Thompson could deviate from script this spring. A source told PackersNews.com on Friday that Thompson, aware his Super Bowl contender continues to underachieve, could show rare aggressiveness in the free-agent market this spring.

The Packers enter this offseason with approximately $35 million in cap space, according to Over the Cap and Spotrac. They could recuperate an additional $9 million on cornerback Sam Shields’ $12.125 million cap hit in 2017 if his concussion prevents him from continuing his career.

[red]

some vet backups and 3rd stringers might be nice to have for the vet minimum vs UDFAs picked up off the streets to fill gaps

guys who already know the pro game. sure guys off the practice squad might have been in our system longer, but does that mean they are better then a guy whos played 5 years in the league, but might not know our system as well?

it sure would have been nice once cbs started "getting hurt" (or just plain sucking) to be able to bring in someone who actually knew how to cover someone

[pbmax]

some vet backups and 3rd stringers might be nice to have for the vet minimum vs UDFAs picked up off the streets to fill gaps

guys who already know the pro game. sure guys off the practice squad might have been in our system longer, but does that mean they are better then a guy whos played 5 years in the league, but might not know our system as well?

it sure would have been nice once cbs started "getting hurt" (or just plain sucking) to be able to bring in someone who actually knew how to cover someone

Problem is that such an approach is not likely to succeed. One of the positions that people thought was OK for depth was CB. If anything, people were on the lookout for safety help, not CB help. Hayward and House left but you have Shields plus Randall, Gunter, Rollins and Goodson plus the other two prospects.

No one was looking for RB depth in March and April.

What Bob and the others are saying is that a difference maker must be found. But the number of times Woodson, Pickett, Peppers or Cook can be found is infrequent.

I think a bigger problem is the wist conundrum: continual problems with the Packers drafting of D personnel. That plus Capers vet friendly system produce poor results when injury strikes.

[Rutnstrut]

The problem is that TT has been so averse to FA that they are now desperate. If he had done this gradually it would have had a better chance to work. IF he breaks from the norm this year they may sign people that wouldn't work out of desperation. It's always better to buy when you don't desperately need what you are buying.

[vince]

The problem is that TT has been so averse to FA that they are now desperate. If he had done this gradually it would have had a better chance to work. IF he breaks from the norm this year they may sign people that wouldn't work out of desperation. It's always better to buy when you don't desperately need what you are buying.
Huh? Their elite level shutdown corner will likely have his career ended to protect his quality of life against concussion syndrome. I agree that does create a very important void in the roster, but what does that have to do with a historical aversion to FA? There was overwhelming consensus that the roster was deep and talented at corner going into the year.

TT should have spent/potentially wasted significant cap space to sign replacement elite players as insurance policies just in case one of their core elite players sustains a career-ending injury?

I guess they should sign Matt Ryan in case Rodgers goes down. How does that work?

[vince]

Are you trying to 'fritz' free agency?
No I have finally seen the light. In Bob We Trust. You too would be wise to show your faith in the virtue of bold free agent shopping to protect against injury - wherever it may surface (it could be anywhere so you need vet free agents everywhere) - and stand up against the darkside of shrewd cap management and player development for continuous playoff runs. Sell out my brotha! It just feels good - and tomorrow may never come.

[Rutnstrut]

Huh? Their elite level shutdown corner will likely have his career ended to protect his quality of life against concussion syndrome. I agree that does create a very important void in the roster, but what does that have to do with a historical aversion to FA? There was overwhelming consensus that the roster was deep and talented at corner going into the year.

TT should have spent/potentially wasted significant cap space to sign replacement elite players as insurance policies just in case one of their core elite players sustains a career-ending injury?

I guess they should sign Matt Ryan in case Rodgers goes down. How does that work?

There has been large holes in the defense before this year.

[Zool]

Rodgers is better than all of them, besides Manning.

Favre, Archie Manning, Tarkenton, Doug Williams. History is rife with HOF QBs that have 0-1 rings. So either the NFL is extremely tough to win a SB or fans have expectation levels that are unrealistic.

Pugger, your point about the Steelers is the fan base not the team IMO. The Rapist does have 3 SB appearances, but had a much better D. That could be coaching, players or both.

I will agree that the current front office does not have a good track record at drafting D and should at very least bring in some new blood for scouting D. At most, I think they should scrap the current D scheme and try again. It's not working.

I suppose at the end of the day it's Thompsons head on the block as he's the guy in charge, but if you bring in a new guy, who's to say he's not Matt Millen 2.0 and drafts 15 wrs in 3 years.

Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.

[vince]

There has been large holes in the defense before this year.

You are asserting that the Packers are now "desperate" due to Thompson's "aversion to free agency." I'd say "desperate" is overly dramatic, but aside from that, I don't see the connection between their current situation, free agent activity, and previous years' defensive holes.

Every team has holes. The question is whether those holes actually cost the team or not. This year they did but I fail to see how those past holes related to the current "desperation".

I don't disagree that Doc Jennings and Jerron McMillan were misses as sidekicks to Burnett filling in for Nick Collins' tragic career-ending neck injury, and Brad Jones was a liability at inside linebacker. During that time though, the defense was 11th, 13th and 14th in points allowed - not elite but not a liability either. Plus all those guys have long since been replaced so what's the connection?

Throw 2013 out since Rodgers missed extended time until returning rusty the last regular season game of the year. They still made the playoffs but they had no shot to threaten the Super Bowl and everyone knew that.

So, how have those past holes caused current desperation, and how would previous free agent activity have addressed it? I'm trying to understand.

[Rutnstrut]

You are asserting that the Packers are now "desperate" due to Thompson's "aversion to free agency." I'd say "desperate" is overly dramatic, but aside from that, I don't see the connection between their current situation, free agent activity, and previous years' defensive holes.

Every team has holes. The question is whether those holes actually cost the team or not. This year they did but I fail to see how those past holes related to the current "desperation".

I don't disagree that Doc Jennings and Jerron McMillan were misses as sidekicks to Burnett filling in for Nick Collins' tragic career-ending neck injury, and Brad Jones was a liability at inside linebacker. During that time though, the defense was 11th, 13th and 14th in points allowed - not elite but not a liability either. Plus all those guys have long since been replaced so what's the connection?

Throw 2013 out since Rodgers missed extended time until returning rusty the last regular season game of the year. They still made the playoffs but they had no shot to threaten the Super Bowl and everyone knew that.

So, how have those past holes caused current desperation, and how would previous free agent activity have addressed it? I'm trying to understand.

Some are saying TT MAY explore fA this year. My hope is that IF he does it's not out of desperation and it will be too little too late. There are reports that he is actually realizing that the window with his all world QB is closing fast. Had he not been so stubborn before, they wouldn't need so much at once.

[Rutnstrut]

Favre, Archie Manning, Tarkenton, Doug Williams. History is rife with HOF QBs that have 0-1 rings. So either the NFL is extremely tough to win a SB or fans have expectation levels that are unrealistic.

Pugger, your point about the Steelers is the fan base not the team IMO. The Rapist does have 3 SB appearances, but had a much better D. That could be coaching, players or both.

I will agree that the current front office does not have a good track record at drafting D and should at very least bring in some new blood for scouting D. At most, I think they should scrap the current D scheme and try again. It's not working.

I suppose at the end of the day it's Thompsons head on the block as he's the guy in charge, but if you bring in a new guy, who's to say he's not Matt Millen 2.0 and drafts 15 wrs in 3 years.

Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.

So you just keep throwing crap at the wall hoping eventually it sticks?

[vince]

Some are saying TT MAY explore fA this year. My hope is that IF he does it's not out of desperation and it will be too little too late. There are reports that he is actually realizing that the window with his all world QB is closing fast. Had he not been so stubborn before, they wouldn't need so much at once.
Maybe he will and maybe he won't. I'd like to see it but as long as the issue (pass defense) gets fixed I don't care how he gets it done.

On a related note, I see you're not interested in connecting any real dots related to your baseless criticisms Rut.

Just how much do you think they need and where?

I guess your right if you think they need vet FA's as insurance policies against unknowable injuries up and down the roster.

Rather than actually figuring out how it works with the cap though (it doesn't) and which young talents you'll need to prematurely give up on (all of them apparently), you're probably safer waiting to see where the rash of injuries actually occur and then blasting Thompson for negligently not signing vets at those specific spots after the fact.

What the hell it works for All-Knowing McGinn. Plus in second-guessing fantasyland, vet free agents are always guaranteed to be cheap and every bit as talented (assuming they had some in the first place) as they were back in their hayday - before whatever it was happened that caused their current team (or every other team in the league if you're scraping your free agents off the street) to no longer want them. There's no sense in being real when fantasy is so much easier.

[pbmax]

Bob's case here would be more believable if he didn't declare them Super Bowl favorites from the NFC each year.

[Pugger]

Favre, Archie Manning, Tarkenton, Doug Williams. History is rife with HOF QBs that have 0-1 rings. So either the NFL is extremely tough to win a SB or fans have expectation levels that are unrealistic.

Pugger, your point about the Steelers is the fan base not the team IMO. The Rapist does have 3 SB appearances, but had a much better D. That could be coaching, players or both.

I will agree that the current front office does not have a good track record at drafting D and should at very least bring in some new blood for scouting D. At most, I think they should scrap the current D scheme and try again. It's not working.

I suppose at the end of the day it's Thompsons head on the block as he's the guy in charge, but if you bring in a new guy, who's to say he's not Matt Millen 2.0 and drafts 15 wrs in 3 years.

Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.

Yes, I realize I was talking about the Steelers fans and how they are assessing this past season compared to the angst I see by Packers fans here and on the other Packers forums I regularly visit.

[Fritz]

Are you trying to 'fritz' free agency?

"Fritz" as a verb. I like it.

[RashanGary]

Id like to back hand bob right across his big yap. Shut the fuck up, bob. Whap.

[Upnorth]

Id like to back hand bob right across his big yap. Shut the fuck up, bob. Whap.

Fritz him right up! Fritz the hell out of him! (Pretty good verb fritz)

[Zool]

So you just keep throwing crap at the wall hoping eventually it sticks?

Or you make smaller scale changes. How often to wholesale changes produce instant or positive results?

[bobblehead]

Yes I was right.
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/tgl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=career&year_min=2007&year_max=2016&game_type=E&game_num_min=0&game_num_max=99&week_num_min=0&week_num_max=99&temperature_gtlt=lt&team_conf_id=All+Conferences&team_div_id=All+Divisions&opp_conf_id=All+Conferences&opp_div_id=All+Divisions&team_off_scheme=Any+Scheme&team_def_align=Any+Alignment&opp_off_scheme=Any+Scheme&opp_def_align=Any+Alignment&c1stat=choose&c1comp=gt&c2stat=choose&c2comp=gt&c3stat=choose&c3comp=gt&c4stat=choose&c4comp=gt&c5comp=choose&c5gtlt=lt&c6mult=1.0&c6comp=choose&order_by=pass_td

Surprisingly New Orleans is the 2nd winningest NFC team of the last decade, 7th best overall in terms of winning %.

That list includes playoff games as well BTW.

Can't believe that organization is wasting a first ballot HOF QB with only one SB trophy. FIRE THEM ALL!!!

[bobblehead]

* It must also be acknowledged for the sake of truth and justice that The Bob has determined that Wolf's record has defined THE WAY to winning, while Thompson's record is completely in spite of himself.

That was what i actually meant. I knew we were among the NFL best last 10 years.

[bobblehead]

Blasphemy. Boldly signing many free agents is THE WAY.

Given Green Bay's virtually unlimited financial resources, continuously signing and dumping players to achieve continous improvement maximizes quality. Anything less just isn't even trying.

Between Mccarthy and Thompson, there's just not enough intelligence in the room.

in an era with no cap and Reggie White available, TT wouldn't even make him an offer.

[Rutnstrut]

Or you make smaller scale changes. How often to wholesale changes produce instant or positive results?

if he actually makes small scale changes, hell yeah. But if TT continues to insist that the ONLY way is DD, get rid of his ass.

[Zool]

if he actually makes small scale changes, hell yeah. But if TT continues to insist that the ONLY way is DD, get rid of his ass.

I think the idea of keeping Capers is the fly in the ointment right now. If the GM thinks that he's providing enough talent, then it's on the DC to make it go. It's been in neutral or reverse for 6 years.

If McCarthy has full control of the coaching staff, and if I were GM, I'd be holding his feet to the fire. Something needs to change on D. The GM isn't going to fire himself, and his track record on the O side is proven, so change something somewhere. If they actually make no changes then its probably time to make larger changes.

Unfortunately none of use can do shit about it.

[pbmax]

I think the idea of keeping Capers is the fly in the ointment right now. If the GM thinks that he's providing enough talent, then it's on the DC to make it go. It's been in neutral or reverse for 6 years.

If McCarthy has full control of the coaching staff, and if I were GM, I'd be holding his feet to the fire. Something needs to change on D. The GM isn't going to fire himself, and his track record on the O side is proven, so change something somewhere. If they actually make no changes then its probably time to make larger changes.

Unfortunately none of use can do shit about it.

I agree with this assessment. I am not certain there was personnel fix to the CBs this year. Its still a failure, but given the way things shook out after camp, it was going to be bad. That is on the front office, preventable or not.

What is in excusable is that there isn't some baseline to fall back on, something they are all trained to execute well that they can do in their sleep.

Maybe Randall was too hurt and not practicing enough to make it work, so you can't pass judgement on this single year.

But both Zool and rutnstrut have a point on the D side of the ball, it happens too often injuries or no, to be allowed to continue. Something needs to change.

1. Simplify pass defense as installed in offseason. Work on man and some kinda zone.

2. Improve productivity in draft on defense, or decide that certain players don't work for this defense

3. Don't get carried away with substitution groups and specialization on D. When those guys get hurt, you have to adjust to the backup AND the change in how the subgroup works.

[Deputy Nutz]

Thompson's strategy is simply, always be in contention and catch that little bit of luck to make deep in the playoffs.

Roster wise it seems that he always has the Packers lined up in the right direction at the beginning of the season and then it usually takes a detour at some point in the season. Maybe it is just the optimism a new season brings and the hope potential finally turns into results with the young players.

It is a no brainer that Thompson's strategy is to build his roster through the draft and then sign his own players. I can't remember the last time that he traded a player (Favre?). Seems that he hangs on to guys just a bit to long and they have no value on the trade market (Sitton), and then he has to release them.

I suppose the biggest issue I say for the Packers is that Thompson is in charge of all personnel decisions and he takes very little advise from the board. There is no owner in GB that can tell Thompson to go out and sign a pass rusher, or a defensive back. Thompson hides from the media because there is no owner holding him accountable. Thompson can sit in his dark film room and ignore the world. Owners can be problems, but fans always want to compare the Packers to the Patriots, the Patriots have Kraft and Hoodie who work extremely well together. The Patriots think outside the box and actively sign players and draft players that fit their system on offense and defense. Look at their Wide Receiver position, it is not a coincidence that the Patriots' best receivers are small, quick, sure handed white guys that know how to destroy a zone defense and are quick enough to beat single coverage with crossing routes and quick passes. The Patriots also are not afraid to go out and get what they think they need. Look at the Bennett trade. They needed another play making TE and they went out and traded for one. It has worked out extremely well, better than the 5th round pick they gave up for him.

It is a proven fact that the Packers will always be in contention as long as Aaron Rodgers is around and Healthy, same as Tom Brady. The Packers front office is the issue, not the coaching. The Packers have a roster including Rodgers that can compete for division titles but not Super Bowls, taking a couple risks in free agency and trading might take this team over the hump, otherwise get used to the Packers being the bridesmaid in the NFC.

[Fritz]

I keep wondering why the defense, with so many first round picks on that side of the ball, sucks ass compared to the offense. Is it Dom? Or is Ted just really shitty at picking defensive talent? McGinn points out that Ted seems to like to draft corners who weren't corners. Is that Ted being dumb, or Ted drafting later in the first round every year so needing to find athleticism that's not available in corners that have plied their trade for a few years in college (since they'd get drafted earlier)?

I don't know. My initial reaction is to push Ted to do something about how he drafts defensive players. Use different scouts, give someone else in the room a bigger voice in the selection, something. That was, for whatever reason, a really really shitty bunch of cornerbacks at the end of the season. And the pass rushers sucked, too. It didn't seem to matter if Dom rushed three or rushed six; rarely did anyone get home - and I don't mean just the Falcons game, either.

[pbmax]

It is a proven fact that the Packers will always be in contention as long as Aaron Rodgers is around and Healthy, same as Tom Brady. The Packers front office is the issue, not the coaching. The Packers have a roster including Rodgers that can compete for division titles but not Super Bowls, taking a couple risks in free agency and trading might take this team over the hump, otherwise get used to the Packers being the bridesmaid in the NFC.

Rodgers guarantees .500. Not playoff contention in any meaningful way.

[vince]

I'm for a new direction on defense but I'll also say this. I don't know shit. You have to know what the problem is, and it's not "the defense sucks for some reason so let's fire the coach." That type of reactionary behavior is why so many teams cycle through new coaching staffs every couple years and get nowhere for long periods of time.

He may be wrong about it, but my sense is that McCarthy believes he understands the problem (not Capers), and what needs to happen to fix it. The fact that the defensive performance has been so inconsistent is troubling, but the fact that they've been good in between being bad, and when they've been bad, it's always been a different issue suggests the problems have been moving targets. They're effective in one area and poor in another. They successfully address the area needing improvement and have a good year - then another thing pops up the next. Personnel, injuries, overcompensating, scheme, and a whole host of issues can cause problems. The fact that it's different things at different times probably suggests that Capers ISN'T the issue.

It's always convenient to scapegoat the Coordinator, as countless assistants know all to well, and if Capers is the problem then let's solve it, but they need to know what's going on and take action to address the problem, not cycle through coaches because something's not right and hoping the new guy does better.

[Deputy Nutz]

When the Packers had their best tandem at cornerback under Thompson they were Woodson and Williams. Williams was signed as a non drafted rookie, and Woodson was Thompson's greatest free agent signing. Sam Shields later developed into a starting cornerback, he was an undrafted rookie. Randall, Rollins, and Hyde were all drafted by Thompson and Hyde has never played as a conventional cornerback. Randall was hybrid safety/corner in a college scheme that relied heavily on man to man coverage. Rollins had only one year of college football. Casey Hayward was a corner in college but had questionable top end speed and played inside. He was left to free agency because of hamstring injuries and the drafting of Rollins, and Randall. The fault in all of this was not recognizing that top end speed and the ability to turn hips and run with a receiver on the outside is a very particular skill set. He hasn't yet drafted a guy suited to play on the outside receiver. Maybe Thompson and his staff struggle to identify these qualities in potential draft picks, but then can see it when they are non drafted free agents? I don't get it.

[Deputy Nutz]

Rodgers guarantees .500. Not playoff contention in any meaningful way.

ok so then the rest of the roster is good for one or two wins.

Factor it this way if Rodgers blew his knee out ala Teddy Bridgewater how many games would the Packer have won? With the current roster and how the season broke with injuries and factoring the impact of Rodgers during games I would say the Packers would have won two games at the most.

Take the Patriots that went 3-1 when Brady was suspended. They shuffled three different QBs during that time due to injury. The Packers simply do not have a roster of guys especially on defense that will allow them to compete for World Championships.

[Rutnstrut]

ok so then the rest of the roster is good for one or two wins.

Factor it this way if Rodgers blew his knee out ala Teddy Bridgewater how many games would the Packer have won? With the current roster and how the season broke with injuries and factoring the impact of Rodgers during games I would say the Packers would have won two games at the most.

Take the Patriots that went 3-1 when Brady was suspended. They shuffled three different QBs during that time due to injury. The Packers simply do not have a roster of guys especially on defense that will allow them to compete for World Championships.

Nor do the Packers have a coaching staff anywhere close to as talented as the Patriots.

[Netmag]

I think that overall the draft strategy works well as long as you have great players in key positions as a base. We've been lucky enough to have that at the most key position for quite some time. The rest is about putting together the other pieces effectively and staying healthy at the right time. This year was a good finish, but we just didn't have enough pieces in place at the right time (especially on D).

In order not to squander our special situation at QB, we need to put the odds in our favor a little bit more. Like the Patriots, you do that by filling some deficiencies with proven assets in certain areas. You can still get most through the draft, but you can't just hope and wish for every single one of those rookies to hit it big in order to close the deal on the Superbowl. I think they're 90% fine with what they're doing now, but they need to be just a little bit more aggressive at filling in the deficiencies with some proven assets.
No, it still won't guarantee anything 100% (there could be key injuries, etc) but what we'd be doing is maximizing the odds. I want to see TT at least attempt to maximize our odds so that we don't just let Rodgers fade with no support like we did Favre. I don't want to just sit and be happy with Rodgers' circus-like weekly heroics and a guaranteed .500 + whatever else we happen to get.

[Netmag]

Yes, we're lopsided in a bad way. I think Rodgers is better than Brady and your example kind of shows that they as a team are good with or without Brady. If we lose Rodgers, we probably wouldn't be any better than .500 and this year we probably indeed would have only had a couple of wins. This is not good by any means, but as long as Rodgers is there, we have an opportunity and responsibility to try to get to the big game every year just like the Patriots. Because of Rodgers, the rest of team doesn't have to be equally as good as the Patsies, but we've got to be more competent in other areas than we are now. The fact that we almost made it to the Superbowl with that level of inconsistency in other phases of the game just shows how great Rodgers must be. Not good to be so lopsided but we still have to try to increase our odds (even if it relies on 1 guy too much).


ok so then the rest of the roster is good for one or two wins.

Factor it this way if Rodgers blew his knee out ala Teddy Bridgewater how many games would the Packer have won? With the current roster and how the season broke with injuries and factoring the impact of Rodgers during games I would say the Packers would have won two games at the most.

Take the Patriots that went 3-1 when Brady was suspended. They shuffled three different QBs during that time due to injury. The Packers simply do not have a roster of guys especially on defense that will allow them to compete for World Championships.

[vince]

I think that overall the draft strategy works well as long as you have great players in key positions as a base. We've been lucky enough to have that at the most key position for quite some time. The rest is about putting together the other pieces effectively and staying healthy at the right time. This year was a good finish, but we just didn't have enough pieces in place at the right time (especially on D).

In order not to squander our special situation at QB, we need to put the odds in our favor a little bit more. Like the Patriots, you do that by filling some deficiencies with proven assets in certain areas. You can still get most through the draft, but you can't just hope and wish for every single one of those rookies to hit it big in order to close the deal on the Superbowl. I think they're 90% fine with what they're doing now, but they need to be just a little bit more aggressive at filling in the deficiencies with some proven assets.
No, it still won't guarantee anything 100% (there could be key injuries, etc) but what we'd be doing is maximizing the odds. I want to see TT at least attempt to maximize our odds so that we don't just let Rodgers fade with no support like we did Favre. I don't want to just sit and be happy with Rodgers' circus-like weekly heroics and a guaranteed .500 + whatever else we happen to get.
Good post Net.

Ted, Mike and Dom need to fix the pass defense one way or another - and continue the elite production offensively. I think that demands re-signing Cook and signing a corner that can hold up on his own on one side to allow Capers to get more aggressive. Then add another wave of young talent through the draft that is deep in some important spots for Green Bay -and I'd say this year has shown they should be as talented as anyone in the league next year.

It's entirely possible though, that most of the guys that are now the top corners projected to hit FA, resign with their current teams before hitting the market, and the demand for what remains drives some teams to spend stupid money on flawed players. Ted can't afford to do that and I don't think he will.

We all probably would feel uncomfortable if that shutdown corner we need immediately has to come from the college ranks, but it does happen every year. I'll take the next Marcus Peters or Jalen Ramsey all day long and twice on Sunday. The challenge there is Ted's obviously not picking in the Top 10, but there should be no excuses. If they can't defend the pass next year, that'll be on Ted no matter. CB is a deep position this year, as is OLB so he needs to hit on someone who can deliver immediately, regardless of whether it's FA or in the Draft I don't really care how he does it. That's up to Ted.

[Fritz]

Good post Net.

Ted, Mike and Dom need to fix the pass defense one way or another - and continue the elite production offensively. I think that demands re-signing Cook and signing a corner that can hold up on his own on one side to allow Capers to get more aggressive. Then add another wave of young talent through the draft that is deep in some important spots for Green Bay -and I'd say this year has shown they should be as talented as anyone in the league next year.

It's entirely possible though, that most of the guys that are now the top corners projected to hit FA, resign with their current teams before hitting the market, and the demand for what remains drives some teams to spend stupid money on flawed players. Ted can't afford to do that and I don't think he will.

We all probably would feel uncomfortable if that shutdown corner we need immediately has to come from the college ranks, but it does happen every year. I'll take the next Marcus Peters or Jalen Ramsey all day long and twice on Sunday. It is a deep position this year, as is OLB.


They just need to fritz that shit up.

[vince]

:D You lost your fritzin' mojo on the NFCC so I'm not sure I really know what that means anymore...

Is it reverse, double reverse, super-sarcastic straight up or what?

[Zool]

I'm for a new direction on defense but I'll also say this. I don't know shit. You have to know what the problem is, and it's not "the defense sucks for some reason so let's fire the coach." That type of reactionary behavior is why so many teams cycle through new coaching staffs every couple years and get nowhere for long periods of time.

He may be wrong about it, but my sense is that McCarthy believes he understands the problem (not Capers), and what needs to happen to fix it. The fact that the defensive performance has been so inconsistent is troubling, but the fact that they've been good in between being bad, and when they've been bad, it's always been a different issue suggests the problems have been moving targets. They're effective in one area and poor in another. They successfully address the area needing improvement and have a good year - then another thing pops up the next. Personnel, injuries, overcompensating, scheme, and a whole host of issues can cause problems. The fact that it's different things at different times probably suggests that Capers ISN'T the issue.

It's always convenient to scapegoat the Coordinator, as countless assistants know all to well, and if Capers is the problem then let's solve it, but they need to know what's going on and take action to address the problem, not cycle through coaches because something's not right and hoping the new guy does better.

Well in any organization, sports or otherwise, there's accountability for performance. A year or 2 of poor performance in one area is one thing. 6 consecutive is another. One department at this org is doing really well for nearly a decade. The other has been shit on ice for 6 years without any changes other than the boots on the ground people. Eventually you don't have an employee issue, you have a management issue.

It has been said very often that Capers' scheme works better with vets. Thompson wants to draft and develop. That doesn't mesh. After some nearly historically bad defenses in the last 3-4 years, it's time to make a change somewhere. If you advise against holding the DC accountable, who's next in line. They keep turning over players and the results are the same.

[pbmax]

I would not be in favor of a CB or else strategy this offseason. I want one, but I would not demand this answer be found this year. That's how the Redskins and other dumb teams operate. I don't want the best CB in the FA class if the guy is a welcome mat. Took awhile and several drafts to find Collins replacement, gonna take some time to find Shields successor.

The fact is that outside of the Top 10 in the draft (and not always then either) you are not guaranteed to get that guy. And FA is very much dependent on who teams let go. The best candidates will likely be resigned. You have to be Jeff Fisher stupid to let the Jared Cook equivalent of a CB go without resigning him. It could happen. But likely won't.

Absent a savior, you need to improve the position. Get better depth so whatever scheme you choose can be supported through the inevitable injuries. If you can get a League marginal starter (which would represent an improvement compared to this year) for a reasonable dollar you do it. Even if he gets surpassed by Randall or Rollins, you are in a better position.

So I guess I am arguing to sign either healthy Peanut Tillman or suddenly cut-malcontent-future safety Darrell Revis. Seriously though, get a guy you can count on for a year or two.

[pbmax]

It has been said very often that Capers' scheme works better with vets. Thompson wants to draft and develop. That doesn't mesh. After some nearly historically bad defenses in the last 3-4 years, it's time to make a change somewhere. If you advise against holding the DC accountable, who's next in line. They keep turning over players and the results are the same.

The playoff catastrophe's are particularly galling. Which points to him holding this thing together with tape and bailing wire at times.

However, a healthy defense was a better performer in 2014 and 2015 playoffs than the offense. So I think its salvageable.

[pbmax]

When the Packers had their best tandem at cornerback under Thompson they were Woodson and Williams. Williams was signed as a non drafted rookie, and Woodson was Thompson's greatest free agent signing. Sam Shields later developed into a starting cornerback, he was an undrafted rookie. Randall, Rollins, and Hyde were all drafted by Thompson and Hyde has never played as a conventional cornerback. Randall was hybrid safety/corner in a college scheme that relied heavily on man to man coverage. Rollins had only one year of college football. Casey Hayward was a corner in college but had questionable top end speed and played inside. He was left to free agency because of hamstring injuries and the drafting of Rollins, and Randall. The fault in all of this was not recognizing that top end speed and the ability to turn hips and run with a receiver on the outside is a very particular skill set. He hasn't yet drafted a guy suited to play on the outside receiver. Maybe Thompson and his staff struggle to identify these qualities in potential draft picks, but then can see it when they are non drafted free agents? I don't get it.

Don't forget House, who was a prototypical outside CB.

And Randall gets shorted a bit here. He clearly has the physical tools to play outside. Enough speed and fluid, with an eye for the ball. But he is not reliable at this point and he couldn't manage to function in a zone that should have helped his health issues at the end of the year.

[Zool]

The playoff catastrophe's are particularly galling. Which points to him holding this thing together with tape and bailing wire at times.

However, a healthy defense was a better performer in 2014 and 2015 playoffs than the offense. So I think its salvageable.

Defense rankings
2016 - 22nd total, 31st pass, 8th rush, 21st for points
2015 - 15th total, 6th pass, 21st rush, 12th points
2014 - 15th total, 10th pass, 23rd rush, 13th points
2013 - 25th total, 24th pass, 25th rush, 24th points
2012 - 11th total, 11th pass, 17th rush, 11th points
2011 - 32nd total, 32nd pass, 14th rush, 19th points
2010 - 5th total, 5th pass, 18th rush, 2nd points

'14 and '15 weren't dumpster fires, but they were average at best. In a results based business, the only real thing a customer can do is vote with their wallet.

[pbmax]

Defense rankings
2016 - 22nd total, 31st pass, 8th rush, 21st for points
2015 - 15th total, 6th pass, 21st rush, 12th points
2014 - 15th total, 10th pass, 23rd rush, 13th points
2013 - 25th total, 24th pass, 25th rush, 24th points
2012 - 11th total, 11th pass, 17th rush, 11th points
2011 - 32nd total, 32nd pass, 14th rush, 19th points
2010 - 5th total, 5th pass, 18th rush, 2nd points

'14 and '15 weren't dumpster fires, but they were average at best. In a results based business, the only real thing a customer can do is vote with their wallet.

Well, I won't buy anything he endorses, but if he could guarantee 15th total and slightly better in points, I'd take it in a heartbeat.

[3irty1]

There is nothing wrong with Ted's recipe. The draft is the ONLY measure for bucking the NFL's parity measures and improving an already good team. Any opportunities found via free agency or trade are icing on the cake. But you can't have NFL success without NFL draft success, especially if you're already good. That said Ted doesn't whip up a batch of Ted's recipe like he used to. There is little room for error or bad luck if you want to win the big one.

[vince]

Well in any organization, sports or otherwise, there's accountability for performance. A year or 2 of poor performance in one area is one thing. 6 consecutive is another. One department at this org is doing really well for nearly a decade. The other has been shit on ice for 6 years without any changes other than the boots on the ground people. Eventually you don't have an employee issue, you have a management issue.

It has been said very often that Capers' scheme works better with vets. Thompson wants to draft and develop. That doesn't mesh. After some nearly historically bad defenses in the last 3-4 years, it's time to make a change somewhere. If you advise against holding the DC accountable, who's next in line. They keep turning over players and the results are the same.
I agree with a lot of what you're saying Zool but I'm not sure the quick fix response of firing the DC will fix the real issues. It's easy to characterize the defense as "shit on ice for 6 years" but that suggests there's been a consistent, ongoing problem that can be solved with a silver bullet to Capers head, but that's just not accurate. They've been good and bad, and the bad has come from different areas. It's not one problem caused by one person. Capers needs to be accountable for what he's responsible for, but so do McCarthy, Thompson, certain players, possibly training staff and others.

Firing Capers could indicate that McCarthy and Thompson aren't holding themselves properly accountable for their share of the real issues that need to be addressed that are outside of Capers' limited sphere of control. Throwing him under the bus (if that were to be the case) would allow them to project a public image of taking action and "demanding results" - but if they don't understand the real issues, or aren't willing to make the changes to deal with them effectively, they're only kicking the can down the road hoping the real problems will either magically go away or they'll be gone by the time they resurface and someone else will get deal with them later.

So not firing Capers likely suggests that, rather than being unwilling to hold people accountable, they're not interested in political smoke and mirrors - but rather that they believe they understand the real problems have a lot of different causes - and they're committed to placing accountability where it truly belongs, including on themselves - to drive the improvements needed for real results. What's more, holding someone (everyone) accountable doesn't necessarily mean firing them is the answer to improvement. They may well still be an important part of the improvement process. In the end it's about doing what it takes to get results, not throwing guys out on the tarmac to show action.

I'm not saying you're wrong because I'm not convinced of all this bullshit myself. Capers is the longest tenured DC in the league. It does feel stale. I'm just saying I have doubts that scapegoating the DC will deliver the results we want. It's not that easy, and starting over introduces a whole new pile of shit on top of the load you may have just covered up.

[Zool]

Yeah I agree that Capers could very well not be the problem, but there's a pretty consistent issue now. It's been repeated for long enough for it to be a trend not an aberration. In my limited knowledge of the behind the scenes at Lombardi Ave, it looks like the DC can occasionally draw up a game plan but not consistently. It could be that the players are not good enough to execute some of his plans but that falls on Thompson. Also we have Capers' track record of starting hot and tapering off with every job he's had in the NFL for the last couple decades.

In my mind, the signs point towards Capers, but who can say. I do get sick of 400 yard passing days against the Packers though.

[pbmax]

Yeah I agree that Capers could very well not be the problem, but there's a pretty consistent issue now. It's been repeated for long enough for it to be a trend not an aberration. In my limited knowledge of the behind the scenes at Lombardi Ave, it looks like the DC can occasionally draw up a game plan but not consistently. It could be that the players are not good enough to execute some of his plans but that falls on Thompson. Also we have Capers' track record of starting hot and tapering off with every job he's had in the NFL for the last couple decades.

In my mind, the signs point towards Capers, but who can say. I do get sick of 400 yard passing days against the Packers though.

The repeatable pattern would seem to be that depth (or lack thereof) cannot execute the same gameplans as starters.

IF heathy, the unit can function. if backups are in key roles, it struggles. And it doesn't struggle in a 24-30 points surrendered way. Its struggles to hold them under 35 points.

[bobblehead]

It is a proven fact that the Packers will always be in contention as long as Aaron Rodgers is around and Healthy, same as Tom Brady. The Packers front office is the issue, not the coaching. .

I dispute this based on what I said in my own thread. TT has sprung off Dorsey, Schneider, and McKenzie. MM has sprung off a pile of shit. TT won a super bowl with Seattle basically acting as GM. MM never won shit anywhere before GB.

I think the issue is much more coaching than it is with the office. I also think the injury riddle needs to be solved. I believe its a testament to both MM and TT that they can lose so many players and make both a NFCC and superbowl.

[vince]

The repeatable pattern would seem to be that depth (or lack thereof) cannot execute the same gameplans as starters.

IF heathy, the unit can function. if backups are in key roles, it struggles. And it doesn't struggle in a 24-30 points surrendered way. Its struggles to hold them under 35 points.
The problems this year in pass defense were significant and have to be fixed. Those problems haven't always surfaced though through previous years though, including last year when the young guys were even younger - but performed far better.

So I can appreciate your confidence in the current guys returning to form PB but even if they do I'm not convinced they have enough talent there yet at the top of the depth chart particularly.

The "defense is too complex for back-ups" theory sounds good, but I'm not convinced that's it at all. Part of the problem this year was that the defense was too simple, predictable, easy to diagnose and attack for too many teams. The same guys who sucked this year played pretty well in the same scheme the year before and it's not because they were doing a bunch of exotic stuff this year that they couldn't handle.

In spite of your confidence PB, I think a big unknown from this year - and moving forward - is the real extent to which Randall and Rollins were impacted by injuries. "If healthy the unit can function." I'm not convince they're not overmatched when healthy if they're playing the same roles again. They played through their pains for the most part - and sucked big donkey balls pretty much all year long after showing a lot of promise as rooks.

Was it because they just couldn't match up with 1's and 2's. Probably in part. Was it because they couldn't run due to playing through persistent injuries? Probably in part. One thing I am confident of is that it had little to do with the gameplan being too complex for them.

In the absence of being physically limited due to injury, I would add that I think Rollins was forced to play a role he's just not ever going to fulfill very well even when healthy. He has a lot of strong attributes but running down the sideline with burners and matching up physically with the big strong receivers outside either at the LOS or downfield aren't among them.

I do think he can play if they can leverage what he does do well and that's play in space in the slot. But maybe I'm overrating him and that's just not true either. He's definitely can't hang with the Kelce's and Gronk's of the league inside. That's Burnett now.

Randall played so far off guys at times he just conceded 10-15 yd. completions. Why? Injury, uncoachable? No confidence? If he's so injured he can't cover than get Hawkins out there and hope for the best. He can't do worse.

So they're are some serious problems of which I don't believe we really have enough information to do much more than throw darts at possible solutions and outcomes.

Gunter showed he can't hang with the league's elite receivers. But no one expected him to be in that position in September. Shields' absence had a domino effect of putting them all in tough spots, along with the injuries? or not.

Based on past experience with young players fighting through injury and getting pushed up the match-up depth chart at the same time, I'd say there's a reasonable chance they continue to develop and regain their form, but we don't really know what's going on. Injured or not you can't give guys 15 yards of cushion.

So with Shields' pretty much a certain goner - and I can't imagine they will put $12 mil and another season on the line even if he wanted to attempt a comeback with how severe his last 2 concussions have been now, there's a big hole at the top of the depth chart that I don't have faith Randall is ready to fill regardless of health. And there's a role for Gunter too, but it's as a #4 corner not #1 - never will be.

A lot of questions and not a lot of answers - at least not yet. A reliable corner that can match up one on one outside, along with the youngun's getting back on track with more favorable roles and better health could make all the difference. Not having that guy really handcuffs the defense, and I just don't see that guy on the roster. It's a lot to ask of a new guy to jump right in and be the man - but that's what needs to happen I think.

[texaspackerbacker]

Pretty good analysis, vince.

"Shields' absence had a domino effect of putting them all in tough spots, along with the injuries." - I think this quote from your post is the most significant reason for the problems and the key to improving things. Other than the slim chance of Shields coming back and being the answer, we badly need a solid #1 cover Corner. Given the shakiness of drafting a Corner for immediate success, I'd really like to see Ted depart from his usual way and signing a top level free agent Corner. We certainly seem to have the money and cap space available for that.

[pbmax]

In spite of your confidence PB, I think a big unknown from this year - and moving forward - is the real extent to which Randall and Rollins were impacted by injuries. "If healthy the unit can function." I'm not convince they're not overmatched when healthy if they're playing the same roles again. They played through their pains for the most part - and sucked big donkey balls pretty much all year long after showing a lot of promise as rooks.


I think we are talking about two things here.

1. If the Defense suffers injuries to starters for more than 1 or 2 games, it has trouble plugging in backups and succeeding. Part of it is depth and lesser talent, but part of it may be packages designed for certain players and groups. When Shields went down, the entire package for this year went out the window. It took 4-6 games to adjust.

This is true of many defenses. But the Packers losses this year weren't catastrophic, they were middle of the road, though definitely tilted to the defense. The problem is that Ted, Mike and Dom cannot surrender 40 points in playoff games versus good teams. That seems preventable. I think they all have a hand in that failure.

2. Cornerback talent on roster. Losing Shields was going to hurt. At best, it elevates Randall to #1 and Rollins/Gunter to #2. None have proven they are worthy of those jobs yet. I still think they might. Injuries make a hash of sorting out Rollins and Randall's seasons, but Randall wasn't exactly lights out even before his injury. That isn't proof, he was beginning his second year full time at CB after being a safety in college, he was going to have some rough times regardless. The fact that he came completely unglued is probably more worrisome than his injuries at this point.

Gunter is limited enough that he will need perfect technique to battle top WR outside. Its possible, but he isn't there yet. Al Harris used to do it, but Al was a rare bird.

Of the three CBs I defended this year, the most disappointing thing might have been Rollins being such a tire fire outside. At one point in camp, he passed Randall on the depth chart I believe and Randall moved inside. He shouldn't be that limited. For both he and Randall, you have to hope health and Whitt work a minor miracle to return them to form so they can continue to progress.

[3irty1]

With the character of our offense we're unlikely to ever have a statistically great defense. Our offense has never been much of a ball-control march-down-the-field kind of outfit. Its explosive, scores quickly and lengthens the game. This is a good thing probably, in a longer game the side with more Aaron Rodgers gets to leverage its Aaron Rodgers advantage more. But a defense that passes the sniff test is not too much to ask for. Dom is capable of this.

I think with Randall/Rollins we're in a position we were in with Morgan Burnett once upon a time during our safety crisis. There really isn't much we can do except hope their recent performance was an arbitration or temporary injury. We need new CB's anyway but it appears the 2017 defense will more or less be as good as those two are.

[Pugger]

Defense rankings
2016 - 22nd total, 31st pass, 8th rush, 21st for points
2015 - 15th total, 6th pass, 21st rush, 12th points
2014 - 15th total, 10th pass, 23rd rush, 13th points
2013 - 25th total, 24th pass, 25th rush, 24th points
2012 - 11th total, 11th pass, 17th rush, 11th points
2011 - 32nd total, 32nd pass, 14th rush, 19th points
2010 - 5th total, 5th pass, 18th rush, 2nd points

'14 and '15 weren't dumpster fires, but they were average at best. In a results based business, the only real thing a customer can do is vote with their wallet.

And that's all we really need - an average defense. If we can get more balance on offense and an average defense that might do the trick. Atlanta is in the SB and they don't have the 85 Bears.

[MadScientist]

There are plenty of times where we can find fault with TT for leaving a position thin e.g. ILB. At the start of the season CB looked like a position of strength, but when injuries and regression make you put the expected 4 or 5th best CB on #1 receivers, things are going to be ugly. You can get through a game, maybe two as coordinators need to see tape to know how to really take advantage, but holes will be found and exploited. It's amazing that the Packers made it as far as they did with Gunter covering the other teams' best receivers. Now that the hole has been exposed, we'll see what TT does to fix it. I'm sure there will be more than enough to bitch about.

[pbmax]

And that's all we really need - an average defense. If we can get more balance on offense and an average defense that might do the trick. Atlanta is in the SB and they don't have the 85 Bears.

Exactly. The 2014 defense was fine versus the Seachickens until hemorrhaging late as M3 and fate kept giving them seemingly unlimited possessions.

2015 Defense had the Packers in a position to beat the "superior" Cardinals if the offense was 75% functional.

The 2013 Defense gave the offense a great chance if the O had figured out man under cover 2. It allowed a bad late drive for a winning FG, but that game was easily in reach at the end.

[Smidgeon]

2. Cornerback talent on roster. Losing Shields was going to hurt. At best, it elevates Randall to #1 and Rollins/Gunter to #2. None have proven they are worthy of those jobs yet. I still think they might. Injuries make a hash of sorting out Rollins and Randall's seasons, but Randall wasn't exactly lights out even before his injury. That isn't proof, he was beginning his second year full time at CB after being a safety in college, he was going to have some rough times regardless. The fact that he came completely unglued is probably more worrisome than his injuries at this point.

Gunter is limited enough that he will need perfect technique to battle top WR outside. Its possible, but he isn't there yet. Al Harris used to do it, but Al was a rare bird.

Of the three CBs I defended this year, the most disappointing thing might have been Rollins being such a tire fire outside. At one point in camp, he passed Randall on the depth chart I believe and Randall moved inside. He shouldn't be that limited. For both he and Randall, you have to hope health and Whitt work a minor miracle to return them to form so they can continue to progress.

What we're seeing here is a regression towards the mean. Their first year, they probably all played better than they really are (there is some luck involved). This year, they probably all played worse than what they rally are (after all, there is some luck involved). They probably exist somewhere in the middle with room to improve. It's more likely (just talking probabilities) that their careers end up closer to the first year than to the second.

[Rutnstrut]

Exactly. The 2014 defense was fine versus the Seachickens until hemorrhaging late as M3 and fate kept giving them seemingly unlimited possessions.

2015 Defense had the Packers in a position to beat the "superior" Cardinals if the offense was 75% functional.

The 2013 Defense gave the offense a great chance if the O had figured out man under cover 2. It allowed a bad late drive for a winning FG, but that game was easily in reach at the end.

When you put it like that, it looks even more like coaches choking at key times.

[RashanGary]

McGinn and the urinal sentinel were writing how good the Packers secondary was before the season. How can they publish that followed by the piece of trash McGinn just wrote, then look their readers in the eye and pretend they have a shred of credibility. Fuck mcginn. He's an idiot who's only talent is mindlessly tracking stats that we like to see. outside of that, he's a moron.

[pbmax]

McGinn and the urinal sentinel were writing how good the Packers secondary was before the season. How can they publish that followed by the piece of trash McGinn just wrote, then look their readers in the eye and pretend they have a shred of credibility. Fuck mcginn. He's an idiot who's only talent is mindlessly tracking stats that we like to see. outside of that, he's a moron.

The funny/not funny part is that Bob wants some FAs signed, but he gives a pass on Hayward because the Packers knew what he could and could not do, plus his injury history.

Those free agents he listed also have flaws that their former teams deemed not worth the money.

Which means if they were signed and did not fit or work out, they would be treated like Manuel, Walker or Chillar. FA signings yes, but really worth the money or time.

So Bob is arguing to roll the dice on a vet, rather then develop. And as always, predict the future.

[pbmax]

Also, Bob liking a big back for December Packers football is an example of Bob remembering what Ron Wolf said (lied about) rather than what he did.

[vince]

1. If the Defense suffers injuries to starters for more than 1 or 2 games, it has trouble plugging in backups and succeeding. Part of it is depth and lesser talent, but part of it may be packages designed for certain players and groups. When Shields went down, the entire package for this year went out the window. It took 4-6 games to adjust.

This is true of many defenses. But the Packers losses this year weren't catastrophic, they were middle of the road, though definitely tilted to the defense. The problem is that Ted, Mike and Dom cannot surrender 40 points in playoff games versus good teams. That seems preventable. I think they all have a hand in that failure.
.
Are you referring to personnel packages? I didn't see guys not used to playing with each other or a bunch of communication gaffes/blown coverages...

I saw guys getting beat. With Shields on the field they pretty much knew he didn't need protection and other guys could cheat more away from him to tighten up the rest of the field. That helps the other guys obviously but it all still comes down to the domino effect that such a significant drop in talent has.

There were times in zone coverages where Randall would allow completions on the over route because he got schooled by the QB's eyes and jumped the short route too soon before the safety could get up and to the sideline in time. Having Shields on the other side doesn't change the fact that he didn't cover well far too often.

What am I missing with these packages?

[bobblehead]

When the Packers had their best tandem at cornerback under Thompson they were Woodson and Williams. Williams was signed as a non drafted rookie, and Woodson was Thompson's greatest free agent signing. Sam Shields later developed into a starting cornerback, he was an undrafted rookie. Randall, Rollins, and Hyde were all drafted by Thompson and Hyde has never played as a conventional cornerback. Randall was hybrid safety/corner in a college scheme that relied heavily on man to man coverage. Rollins had only one year of college football. Casey Hayward was a corner in college but had questionable top end speed and played inside. He was left to free agency because of hamstring injuries and the drafting of Rollins, and Randall. The fault in all of this was not recognizing that top end speed and the ability to turn hips and run with a receiver on the outside is a very particular skill set. He hasn't yet drafted a guy suited to play on the outside receiver. Maybe Thompson and his staff struggle to identify these qualities in potential draft picks, but then can see it when they are non drafted free agents? I don't get it.

The undrafted guys both had big speed and great hips, but also huge questions coming out. The guys who have that with no real questions are gone in the first 15 picks.

[pbmax]

Are you referring to personnel packages? I didn't see guys not used to playing with each other or a bunch of communication gaffes/blown coverages...

I saw guys getting beat. With Shields on the field they pretty much knew he didn't need protection and other guys could cheat more away from him to tighten up the rest of the field. That helps the other guys obviously but it all still comes down to the domino effect that such a significant drop in talent has.

There were times in zone coverages where Randall would allow completions on the over route because he got schooled by the QB's eyes and jumped the short route too soon before the safety could get up and to the sideline in time. Having Shields on the other side doesn't change the fact that he didn't cover well far too often.

What am I missing with these packages?

One instance that comes to mind is Matthews in the middle of the nickel pass rush D. There seemed to be a lot of debate about who was covering the flat. And then the guy was wide open.

[Bossman641]

Bobs analysis of Rowe doesn't match up with what I have read in 2-3 other articles this week about how he has struggled.