2016 Packer Special Teams (Mediocre)

[pbmax]

http://www.espn.com/blog/statsinfo/post/_/id/129505/ohio-state-is-no-1-in-preseason-fpi-1-0

Article is about Lions, but mentions midway the Packers were 29th last year.

Packers at Scout.com has a system that makes more baseline sense to me (changes of field position and FG%) that ranks the Packers 17th.


Green Bay finished 17th in our five-category breakdown of net punting (for and against), starting field position on kickoffs (for and against) and field-goal accuracy. The Packers finished sixth in opponent net punting, 10th in field goals with Crosby and 15th in field position on kickoff returns, but 24th in net punting with Jacob Schum and last in field position following opponents’ kickoff returns.

http://www.scout.com/nfl/packers/story/1754680-packers-29th-in-dmn-special-teams-rankings

[vince]

There's definitely room for improvement, but this had a lot to do with injuries. A lot of special teamers were pressed into action (Gunter) or were hurt for extended periods themselves (Elliott, Banjo) which meant guys who should've been on the practice squad (Hawkins, Whitehead, Waters, etc.) were promoted to play special teams and weren't very good at it.

[pbmax]

There's definitely room for improvement, but this had a lot to do with injuries. A lot of special teamers were pressed into action (Gunter) or were hurt for extended periods themselves (Elliott, Banjo) which meant guys who should've been on the practice squad (Hawkins, Whitehead, Waters, etc.) were promoted to play special teams and weren't very good at it.

Packers were middle of the road in injuries this year I thought. This wasn't the death march other years have been unless you were a DB

[vince]

Maybe. I'd be interested in seeing injury data and how that's presented/interpreted. Key special teamers were directly and indirectly lost or significantly debilitated for significant portions of the year.

[gbgary]

injuries makes sense but talent is a factor too. since the general talent level of our starters is mediocre to good, it naturally goes that our depth (that special teams is made up of) is mediocre to poor. injuries compound this effect.

[vince]

Disagree with your premise gary. Packers talent if 100% healthy was top 5 this year.

[vince]

Ranking NFL teams most affected by injuries (http://www.espn.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/223136/ranking-nfl-teams-most-affected-by-injuries) That was written Dec. 2.
Packers #2 Most Affected by Injury

Defensively, the Packers have played four games without linebacker Clay Matthews, who now is suffering from a shoulder injury. They also have been short-handed at cornerback all season. Top cover man Sam Shields has played in only one game because of post-concussion symptoms. Damarious Randall missed six games after groin surgery and Quinten Rollins (groin) missed three. Since Week 6, a period when all three corners missed time, the Packers have allowed the NFL's highest opposing QBR (76.4). They are 2-5 in that span.
That doesn't appear to be scientific, just one ESPN NFL Writer's assessment...

I don't recall any team's injury report looking much like GB's late in the year, and that doesn't include IR'd players...

[gbgary]

Disagree with your premise gary. Packers talent if 100% healthy was top 5 this year.

but don't really believe that. we have one elite player (at the most important position), two or three good players, several above average players, and 35 mediocre to poor guys.

[vince]

but don't really believe that. we have one elite player (at the most important position), two or three good players, several above average players, and 35 mediocre to poor guys.
IMO, you're either underestimating the Packers' roster, overestimating the rest of the league's rosters, or a bit of both.

I don't remember the thread (I'll try to find it.) but I posted a laundry list of NFL analysts who agreed with me at the beginning of the year. They all listed GB as Top 10 minimum in terms of overall roster talent.

Also, having elite talent at the most important positions brings premium value. It's a vital part of overall roster construction, not something to discount or eliminate from consideration. No team can afford to be elite everywhere.

[vince]

NFL Power Rankings 2016: Examining Super Bowl Favorites Following Preseason (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2661654-nfl-power-rankings-2016-examining-super-bowl-favorites-following-preseason) Packers #3

Preseason Power Rankings (http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/17319873/nfl-2016-preseason-power-rankings-seattle-seahawks-arizona-cardinals-top-new-england-patriots-behind) Packers #4

PFF: Ranking the rosters of all 32 NFL teams - 2016 (https://www.reddit.com/r/nfl/comments/4mu6ua/pff_ranking_the_rosters_of_all_32_nfl_teams/) Packers #2

Ranking the rosters of all 32 NFL teams - 2015 (http://www.espn.com/nfl/insider/story/_/id/13046017/seattle-seahawks-top-ranking-rosters-all-32-teams-nfl) Packers #2

Ranking the rosters of all 32 NFL teams - 2014 (http://www.espn.com/nfl/insider/story/_/id/13046017/seattle-seahawks-top-ranking-rosters-all-32-teams-nfl) Packers #8

NFL Power Rankings 2016: Early look at where teams stand as OTAs begin (http://www.si.com/nfl/2016/05/25/nfl-offseason-power-rankings-teams-analysis) Packers #8

NFL's most talented teams - 2015 (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000493967/article/seahawks-jets-and-eagles-among-nfls-most-talented-teams) Packers #8

Ranking the Top 10 Most Talented Rosters in the NFL (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2643878-ranking-the-top-10-most-talented-rosters-in-the-nfl/page/6) Packers #6

Walter Football: NFL Power Rankings (http://walterfootball.com/nflpowerrankings.php) Packers #1


Ranking the 10 LEAST Talented Rosters in the NFL (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2645054-ranking-the-10-least-talented-rosters-in-the-nfl) Packers - conspicuously absent
I found none who rated the Packers in the mediocre range as far as talent goes.

[ThunderDan]

When you need to hold up a big fucking sign that says PUNT you probably have special teams issues.

[texaspackerbacker]

but don't really believe that. we have one elite player (at the most important position), two or three good players, several above average players, and 35 mediocre to poor guys.

I wouldn't be quite so extreme about it, but basically what you say has an element of truth, and yeah, I suppose that affects special teams. A related factor, though, would seem to be the Packer tendency to favor players who are just a little bit less fast and athletic and a little bit more finesse or whatever. Those big brutal safeties some teams have or super fast wideouts or beastly linebackers also tend to be good special teamers. Just look at who has stood out on Packer special teams: guys like Elliot and Janis who pretty much break that tendency.

[red]

its sad that they've been so terrible the last few years that they seemed pretty good to me this year

[pbmax]

its sad that they've been so terrible the last few years that they seemed pretty good to me this year

They have been much better in coverage under Zook and then took a huge step backward on kick returns this year.

[gbgary]

I found none who rated the Packers in the mediocre range as far as talent goes.

they were riding Rodgers rep (not actual play from last year), guessing that Jordy would be Jordy, counting on a secondary that looked pretty good at the end of last year, a defense that was adequate in total, a solid o-line, and a lighter/stronger Lacy.

so what did your eyes tell you this season? they told you that until Rodgers/Nelson got good (around week 8) that this team was going nowhere. the d regressed, Lacy was lost, the o-line stayed solid though. you have to ask yourself what this team would look like without Rodgers? it would be the definition of mediocre or worse.
let's hope TT pulls off some miracles/surprises in the draft/free agency.



They have been much better in coverage under Zook and then took a huge step backward on kick returns this year.

definitely!

[Upnorth]

so what did your eyes tell you this season? they told you that until Rodgers/Nelson got good (around week 8) that this team was going nowhere. the d regressed, Lacy was lost, the o-line stayed solid though.


My eyes told me that they were 3-1 including playing 2 playoff teams (det and nyg) prior to the injuries to corner, et al. Injuries are not an excuse, but we did suffer deep injuries in one area.

[vince]

they were riding Rodgers rep (not actual play from last year), guessing that Jordy would be Jordy, counting on a secondary that looked pretty good at the end of last year, a defense that was adequate in total, a solid o-line, and a lighter/stronger Lacy.

so what did your eyes tell you this season? they told you that until Rodgers/Nelson got good (around week 8) that this team was going nowhere. the d regressed, Lacy was lost, the o-line stayed solid though.
Do you realize you're saying that you believe the problems were definitively NOT talent here?

Paragraph 1 (evaluated talent before season) = Paragraph 2 + injuries

The talent is/was top shelf less season-ending severe concussions (Shields) plus injuries that caused key players in all three phases to miss significant portions of the year and/or play at a fraction of their talent due to groin surgeries (Randall & Linsley), torn groins (Rollins & Burnett), torn shoulders (Mathews), broken hands (Perry, Elliott & Janis), torn knees (Nelson, Tretter, Guion, Banjo & Martinez), hip injuries ultimately requiring surgery (Lang), high ankle sprains (Cook & Lacy), broken ankles & feet (Lacy & Lang), quad contusions (Burnett), etc.

With the notable exception of Shields, basically all those injuries should be rehabbed leading into next season and the overall talent level figures to be right back at or near the top of the league when everyone goes in healthy.

[gbgary]

Do you realize you're saying that you believe the problems were definitively NOT talent here?

Paragraph 1 (evaluated talent before season) = Paragraph 2 + injuries



i'm saying it's both. the only reason we finished where we did was because we have the best player in the nfl at the most important position on the team. what if we had cam newton at qb...we'd be carolina...6-10. the defense wasn't as good as those experts thought and only got worse as the injuries occurred. the d needs some serious upgrades in talent and the whole team could use some luck in the injury dept. this team (other than Rodgers) is mediocre over all.