Packers rate 7th in dysfunction?

[packinpatland]

Realy?????


Perloff's Blog
http://www.fannation.com/blogs/post/22294
Ten most dysfunctional offseasons

This time of year most of the NFL news is negative, so it's a good time to look back at what's gone wrong in the offseason. Here's my take on the 10 most dysfunctional teams of this offseason. Keep in mind, this is just for the last five months, so a perennially dysfunctional team like the Cardinals didn't make the cut.

1. Chargers - San Diego fired Marty Schottenheimer because he didn't get along with general manager A.J. Smith despite last year's 14-2 mark. And coordinators Wade Phillips and Cam Cameron left for head coaching jobs.

2. Dolphins - Both fans and veterans spoke out against the selection of Ted Ginn Jr. at No. 9 in the draft. And their handling of the Daunte Culpepper situation has been ugly.

3. Chiefs - It took too long to ship Trent Green to Miami and the QB situation became an unneeded distraction. DE Jared Allen, who will serve a four-game NFL suspension for DUI, was unhappy he got franchise tagged and RB Larry Johnson's impending free agency looms on the horizon.

4. Falcons - They dealt one of the NFL's top backup QBs, Matt Schaub, before the Michael Vick dogfighting scandal broke. Now they have too much invested in Vick to distance themselves from their controversial quarterback.

5. Bengals - The bottom line is Cincinnari was at a zero tolerance for any arrests. There have been two this offseason - A.J. Nicholson (since released) and Quincy Wilson (last weekend at a wedding). Not good.

6. Bears - The Super Bowl loser jinx appears to be alive and well. LB Lance Briggs was furious about being franchise tagged and may hold out, DE Alex Brown wants to be traded and DT Tank Johnson went to jail and will serve an eight-game NFL suspension.

7. Packers - First, the Packers had to wait to see if Brett Favre would come back, then they didn't draft the players Favre wanted. It's not easy to see where Green Bay is going in the post-Favre era.

8. Titans - Tennessee is trying to distance itself from Pacman, but the team hasn't gotten far enough away from the troubled cornerback. And the Titans failed to address some pretty big holes in free agency.

9. Buccaneers - How many QBs does coach Jon Gruden need? Tampa traded for Jake Plummer and signed Jeff Garcia, with Chris Simms still in the fold. Plummer then retired (at least for now) and Garcia has jumped way ahead of Simms in the QB battle.

10. Giants - The Giants ended last season mired in dysfunction. They cut some of the bad apples, but you still get the feeling this locker room isn't on the same page with coach Tom Coughlin. TE Jeremy Shockey worked out in Miami again this offseason and you know he has a major explosion coming at some point this season

[Charles Woodson]

Thats a stupid article. Bengals should be number one. Titans should be a lil higher

[Rastak]

WTF? No Vikings! Whoo Hoo! Every damn year they make that stupid list.



:D :D :D

[Patler]

Realy?????


Perloff's Blog
http://www.fannation.com/blogs/post/22294
Ten most dysfunctional offseasons



7. Packers - First, the Packers had to wait to see if Brett Favre would come back, then they didn't draft the players Favre wanted. It's not easy to see where Green Bay is going in the post-Favre era.



Don't you just love it when a writer is so far off base on the facts he uses to support his comment?

1. "First, the Packers had to wait to see if Brett Favre would come back..."
Not true - Favre's return was announced February 2, earlier than recent years, and before anyone became very antsy wondering about it. He announced before FA, the draft, everything. No uncertainty this year that mattered at all.

2. "...then they didn't draft the players Favre wanted. "
Also not true. - They didn't sign Moss as a FA. I recall no comment from Favre about who they should draft. They drafted two receivers, two runningbacks and a tight end, including their 2nd, 3rd and 5th round picks.

3. "It's not easy to see where Green Bay is going in the post-Favre era."
It's not? Maybe for the writer, but I think it is clear to most people that TT wants to build a strong defense to lead the team in the post-Favre era, and he is trying to solidify an offensive line that will be the strength of the offense.

[The Leaper]

I don't think this guy knows anything about the Packers situation.

The real "wait" regarding Favre came following the 2005 season...the team went 4-12 and was facing a serious rebuilding campaign. When Favre decided to return following that season, it was pretty likely he had made the decision to try to play 2-3 more years and see if he could get one more shot at a playoff run. Personally, I was 100% convinced he was going to return in 2007, even after the Chicago cry fest...and I'm 75% convinced he is going to return in 2008. The guy is still a damn good QB if you put some weapons around him.

I also agree that the plan for the post-Favre era is clearly seen in the last two first round picks and last four major free agent signings...Hawk, Harrell, Kampman, Woodson, Pickett and Jenkins. This team is building a strong defense going forward...which is the whole reason Favre threw a hissy fit in the first place.

How can you say the Chargers are most dysfunctional? They were dumb for firing Schotty? Why? The guy has proven time and time and time again that he is a failure when it comes to the postseason. The Chargers are talented...and are more likely to take the next step to an AFC title without Shotty in charge.

The Dolphins, Falcons and Bengals are all far more dysfunctional than the Chargers.

[wist43]

I wouldn't use the term "dysfunctional" to describe the Packers offseason, but I understand where national writers would look askew at what TT is doing.

The NFL is a short-term league - most contracts running in the 3-5 year range. The rules are set up to allow a team to retool fairly quickly; and, given that Favre's days are numbered and most don't view Rodgers as the answer, it isn't surprising that national writers would be skeptical or critical of TT's approach.

I don't think there is any denying that TT is taking the long, longer, longest approach to building the team. We're in year 3 of the TT era and the team is still below average; Favre's retirement portends a major setback; and, deserved or not, most don't expect TT to do anything in the FA market.

Not dysfunctional... just very tortoise like and not very sexy.

[packinpatland]

Not dysfunctional... just very tortoise like and not very sexy.


In other words, functional :wink:

[pittstang5]

2. "...then they didn't draft the players Favre wanted. "


These are the type of comments from writers that really burn me. So who did Favre want in the draft? Please, Mr. Perlof, elaborate.

[rpiotr01]

2. "...then they didn't draft the players Favre wanted. "


These are the type of comments from writers that really burn me. So who did Favre want in the draft? Please, Mr. Perlof, elaborate.


Agreed.

As if GMs should draft based on who their star players want to begin with... :roll:

EDIT: Looking again, it's all this favre crap, and nothing about that little situation regarding the president of our team. That's the reason our offseason can be described as dysfunctional, not because of anything favre did or said...

[Patler]

EDIT: Looking again, it's all this favre crap, and nothing about that little situation regarding the president of our team. That's the reason our offseason can be described as dysfunctional, not because of anything favre did or said...

Excellent point!

[Patler]

I don't think there is any denying that TT is taking the long, longer, longest approach to building the team. We're in year 3 of the TT era and the team is still below average; Favre's retirement portends a major setback; and, deserved or not, most don't expect TT to do anything in the FA market.


In all fairness, if you want to emphasize being in year 3 of the rebuilding process, you really need to see the results of year 3 first. Time and time again the offseason evaluations of the good and bad teams turn out to be very, very wrong; although most often it is the other way, ones that are expected to be contenders fall flat on their faces.

[Rastak]

I don't think there is any denying that TT is taking the long, longer, longest approach to building the team. We're in year 3 of the TT era and the team is still below average; Favre's retirement portends a major setback; and, deserved or not, most don't expect TT to do anything in the FA market.


In all fairness, if you want to emphasize being in year 3 of the rebuilding process, you really need to see the results of year 3 first. Time and time again the offseason evaluations of the good and bad teams turn out to be very, very wrong; although most often it is the other way, ones that are expected to be contenders fall flat on their faces.



I've heard the Packers are contenders and the Vikings aren't....... :wink:

[Creepy]

Can't agree with you Leaper, I see SD taking a big drop. Rivers will be in his second season as a starter and now has to work with a new OC, the team has enw DC and HC. They fired a coach who hasn't won a SB, but has lead three different teams to the play-offs and twice in the last three years with SD. Prio to his arrival in 2002 the last time a SD team made the pay-offs was 1995.

Using the "He can't win the big one" is crap. With that idea it would have been OK if Indianapolis had fired Dungy after the 2005 season. Schottemnheimer should not have been fired and teh Chargers will miss the play-offs in 2007.

[wist43]

I don't consider any team in the NFC to be a true "contender"... In no way, shape, or form do I consider the Packers to be contenders.

Somebody from the NFC will make it to the SB, and since they're in the game, they'll have a "punchers chance"; but really, no one in the NFC is worthy of making it to the big game.

[packinpatland]

I don't consider any team in the NFC to be a true "contender"... In no way, shape, or form do I consider the Packers to be contenders.

Somebody from the NFC will make it to the SB, and since they're in the game, they'll have a "punchers chance"; but really, no one in the NFC is worthy of making it to the big game.

Oh you of very little faith.

[The Leaper]

Using the "He can't win the big one" is crap. With that idea it would have been OK if Indianapolis had fired Dungy after the 2005 season.

Dungy's record in the playoffs was far better than Sch-NOT's. The Sch-NOT is 5-13 in the playoffs. 5-13! Compare that to Dungy's 6-8 record prior to last year. It wasn't close. Dungy has gone to the playoffs more often (9 times in 11 seasons vs. 13 times in 20 seasons), and has had more success when he has gotten there...even if he hadn't got over the hump prior to last year. You always had the feeling Dungy was close...I've never had the feeling that the Sch-NOT was close.

The Sch-NOT has won 12 games in the regular season 5 times. In those 5 years with teams that were reasonably dominant in the regular season, he has a sparkling 1-5 playoff record. I'm sorry...that sucks.

Sitting here and defending the Sch-NOT is pointless. The guy is absolutely useless in the postseason. The Chargers are a highly talented team that had a great coaching staff (outside of the Sch-NOT) who won 12 or more games twice in the last 3 years...without a playoff win to show for it.

Rivers will be fine. He has a guy to hand the ball to...maybe you've heard of him. He has the best receiving TE in the game. He has a ridiculously talented defense to fall back on.

The Chargers may take a year to get accustomed to Turner...but Turner probably has a far better chance to take the Chargers to the top than the Sch-NOT offered.

[Guiness]

How can you say the Chargers are most dysfunctional? They were dumb for firing Schotty? Why? The guy has proven time and time and time again that he is a failure when it comes to the postseason. The Chargers are talented...and are more likely to take the next step to an AFC title without Shotty in charge.



Agreed that dumping Schotty was not a bad idea. I would think their dysfunction comes more from losing Wade Phillips and Cam Cameron - they essentially lost their whole coaching staff. However, they're talented enough, and I think after a slow start while they get things together, and institute whatever new system is brought in, they'll do fine.

#1 has to be the Bengals. I mean come on, it's not even close this year.

And yes Rastak, the Vike's have been quiet. They've deservedly fallen off the list. I'm sure the writer was thinking there was something missing when he wrote it up :twisted:

[Patler]

I don't consider any team in the NFC to be a true "contender"... In no way, shape, or form do I consider the Packers to be contenders.

Somebody from the NFC will make it to the SB, and since they're in the game, they'll have a "punchers chance"; but really, no one in the NFC is worthy of making it to the big game.

It's just a tiny bit early to make a conclusion about the ability of a team or teams come next January. Perhaps you should wait until they maybe play a game or something!

There is always the possibilty of a decent team hitting their stride. A team like the Bears, with a solid defense and great special teams. If Grossman suddenly matures, it could be a team that is worthy of being in the Super Bowl.

[Charles Woodson]

I don't consider any team in the NFC to be a true "contender"... In no way, shape, or form do I consider the Packers to be contenders.

Somebody from the NFC will make it to the SB, and since they're in the game, they'll have a "punchers chance"; but really, no one in the NFC is worthy of making it to the big game.


The saints are pretty solid

[Guiness]

I don't consider any team in the NFC to be a true "contender"... In no way, shape, or form do I consider the Packers to be contenders.

Somebody from the NFC will make it to the SB, and since they're in the game, they'll have a "punchers chance"; but really, no one in the NFC is worthy of making it to the big game.


The saints are pretty solid

Saints are my pick too. Last year they were the feel good team, that hit on all cylinders all year long (even though we almost beat them).

We'll have to see how the sophomore jinx works for them. Colston was a big part of things, and I'm not sold on him. Can Payton pull it off again? Cause I think last year was a little bit of him getting players to go beyond their abilities.

[Joemailman]

Packers are dysfunctional because they didn't draft the players Favre wanted? Who wrote this? Bus Cook? :bang:

[Bretsky]

I don't consider any team in the NFC to be a true "contender"... In no way, shape, or form do I consider the Packers to be contenders.

Somebody from the NFC will make it to the SB, and since they're in the game, they'll have a "punchers chance"; but really, no one in the NFC is worthy of making it to the big game.


The saints are pretty solid


Yes, don't forget about the Saints; rumor has it they drafted a great talent in round one :lol:

[Zool]

I don't consider any team in the NFC to be a true "contender"... In no way, shape, or form do I consider the Packers to be contenders.

Somebody from the NFC will make it to the SB, and since they're in the game, they'll have a "punchers chance"; but really, no one in the NFC is worthy of making it to the big game.


The saints are pretty solid


Yes, don't forget about the Saints; rumor has it they drafted a great talent in round one :lol:
So you think this is Reggie Bush's year?

[wist43]

Well, yeah, the Saints have a shot in the NFC... Seattle has a shot, Philly has a shot.

In the end, none of them belong on the same field with NE, Indy, SD, Balt, et al.

The AFC is light years better than the NFC - that's just the way it is. Go back to the 80's, the NFC was the dominant conference, and the AFC was the weak sister.

[CaliforniaCheez]

I think Seattle misses the playoffs.

I look for the 49'ers and Packers to return to the playoffs.

Look for the Wild Card teams to come from the NFC South and North.

In the NFL there is change every year.

[Fritz]

Just another national writer given an assignment and coming up with manufactured crap in order to fill some space.

[BobDobbs]

Not to mention that he didn't even mention the front office firing, Bob Harlan staying on and trying to scramble to find a replacement. Think about the organization before Harlan took over. THAT was dysfunctional. He leaves us with a Super Bowl, a new stadium, economic stability, and a rejuvenated tradition.

The uncertainty at the top may not impact two a days, but it definitely will impact the 'functionality' of the team.