Today's optimistic Vandermause Packers column from GBPG

[RashanGary]

1 Time Winners in last 27 years (The year of Montanta's first ring):
Aaron Rodgers?
1. Eli Manning #17 defense
2. Peyton Manning #1 defense
3. Ben Rothlisbuger #3 defense
4. Brad Johnson #1 defense
5. Trent Dilfer #1 defense
6. Kurt Warner #4 defense
7. Brett Favre #1 defense
8. Steve Young #6 defense
9. Mark Rypien #2 defense
10. Jeff Hostetler #1 defense
11. Doug Williams #6 defense
12. Phil Simms #2 defense
13. Jim McMahon #1 defense
14. Jim Plunket #14 defense
15. Joe Theisman #1 defense




Multi Winners (In last 27 years):
1. Tom Brady #2 defense
2. Tom Brady #1 defense
3. Tom Brady #4 defense
4. John Elway #8 defense
5. John Elway #6 defense
6. Troy Aikman #3 defense
7. Troy Aikman #2 defense
8. Troy Aikman #5 defense
9. Joe Montana #3 defense
10. Joe Montana #8 defense
11. Joe Montana #1 defense
12. Joe Montana #2 defense

[RashanGary]

Average defense ranking for 1 time winners = #4.0 defense
Average defense ranking for multi winners = #3.7 defense



Now I will remove the high two and low two from both multi winners and 1 time winners just to get rid of unusually high or low data.


Average defensive rank for 1 time winners = #2.5 defense
Average defensive rank for mulit winners = #3.4 defense





1 time SB winners seem to need about the #2 or #3 defenses to win
mult winners seem to need #3 or #4 defenses to win


Do we have a #2 defense? If you answer that with a "NO", then I think the chances are good we don't win the SB next year. If you can honestly say "yes" (and I don't know how you could), then I think you can say we will compete for the SB. It would seem both 1 time winners and multi winners need really good teams around them.


I certainly think the Packers can be playoff competive, but with or without Brett, I think it was going to be a struggle to win the SB because of our pass rush.

[Packnut]

Coaching

Average defense ranking for 1 time winners = #4.0 defense
Average defense ranking for multi winners = #3.7 defense



Now I will remove the high two and low two from both multi winners and 1 time winners just to get rid of unusually high or low data.


Average defensive rank for 1 time winners = #2.5 defense
Average defensive rank for mulit winners = #3.4 defense





1 time SB winners seem to need about the #2 or #3 defenses to win
mult winners seem to need #3 or #4 defenses to win


Do we have a #2 defense? If you answer that with a "NO", then I think the chances are good we don't win the SB next year. If you can honestly say "yes" (and I don't know how you could), then I think you can say we will compete for the SB. It would seem both 1 time winners and multi winners need really good teams around them.


I certainly think the Packers can be playoff competive, but with or without Brett, I think it was going to be a struggle to win the SB because of our pass rush.

We have the talent on defense, we do not have quality coaching. Succesful defensive coordinators all have one thing in common. They devise blitz packages that when called at the right time, are un-stopable. Fritz had Butler for an example. Knew how to use him and had a knack for when to call it. Look at how well the Giants D played. The guy in Philly has made a living off of it.

We have Bob Sanders.

[Bretsky]

We definitely share the same enthusiasm for Bob Sanders P'nut

I'm in the middle on AROD; he certainly has the talent around him where if he's smart he can be successful.

[RashanGary]

I think he can have some success too. Playoffs in the 1st year constitutes success. Winning a championship is another thing. That Dline is going to have to take a big step forward. Where does it come from though?

Harrell, Jolly, Thompson, Mongomery, Hunter


ummmm.... Forgive me while I doubt it.

[texaspackerbacker]

So now we get criticism of Bob Sanders and the Packers defensive coaching staff.

There is no question that the Packers played good defense last season. There's no question that we have quite a few good players on D. The question is, did the Packer D UNDER-ACHIEVE compared to what the quality of personnel would have been expected to accomplish? Or did decent, but not really all that great Packer personnel OVER-ACHIEVE mainly because of the schemes they used--Batesian-style defense, DEs set up wider than normal, press coverage by Corners with Safety help over the top, etc.?

I say it is the latter, I say that Sanders et al are to be praised for getting more out of the Packer defense that sum total of quality of individuals would have justified.

[RashanGary]

I'm a very big believer in talent over coaching. IF the Packers had Strahan, Tuck and Osi Uminyora instead of Kamp, Jenkins and KGB, I think we would have won the game and maybe the SB.

[texaspackerbacker]

I'm a very big believer in talent over coaching. IF the Packers had Strahan, Tuck and Osi Uminyora instead of Kamp, Jenkins and KGB, I think we would have won the game and maybe the SB.

Which makes my point: the coaching staff did a great job to get as much out of what we had as they did.

[RashanGary]

I agree. I think they did a fine job with good but not great talent. Great talent makes coaches look like geniuses and bad talent makes them look idiotic. Everyone thinks they can call a better game, but when the guys on the other side are better, how are you going to overcome that? .

[Bretsky]

So now we get criticism of Bob Sanders and the Packers defensive coaching staff.

There is no question that the Packers played good defense last season. There's no question that we have quite a few good players on D. The question is, did the Packer D UNDER-ACHIEVE compared to what the quality of personnel would have been expected to accomplish? Or did decent, but not really all that great Packer personnel OVER-ACHIEVE mainly because of the schemes they used--Batesian-style defense, DEs set up wider than normal, press coverage by Corners with Safety help over the top, etc.?

I say it is the latter, I say that Sanders et al are to be praised for getting more out of the Packer defense that sum total of quality of individuals would have justified.

Ah Tex.......you've been away too long. I've was hammering Sanders two years ago when the last four games may have saved his job. He's bland and unimaginative. Our defense should have been better last year IMO.
Watching the Giants game over a couple times has renewed my distaste.

[RashanGary]

The Giants don't get away with anything without the stud DE's. That coach would look like an idiot if he didn't have great talent on the Dline.

[texaspackerbacker]

The Giants don't get away with anything without the stud DE's. That coach would look like an idiot if he didn't have great talent on the Dline.

Very true ..... but we aren't talking about the Giants coaches; We're talking about the Packers coaches--who presided over an outstanding D on a 13-3/14-4 team. And they did it without DEs as good as the Giants, with OK but not great DTs, with everybody's former favorite whipping boy at MLB, with a very very good, but not exactly all pro--yet anyway weakside OLB, with a strongside OLB that almost everybody sees as sub-standard. with two outstanding, but aging Corners who probably accomplished more good than at any time in their careers, one Safety who is currently everybody's favorite whipping boy, and another Safety who came out of nowhere to play outstanding in the scheme. The backups were pretty much unheralded also.

Why is it so difficult, Bretsky and others, to give credit to the coaches--Sanders and even the damn near unmentionable Schottenheimer--for scheme that brought better defense than expected from the individual players?

[wist43]

Man, you guys surely do shovel some shit...

I've been consistent, and the things that I said needed to happen for them to be competitive came to pass - to the shock of many. I give TT credit for that, and give McCarthy credit for that. I've liked TT's drafts for the most part, even if I haven't agreed with some of the picks - most notably Harrell and Rodgers.

That said, I'm sorry to interupt your love fest... I see I've been away too long... did you rah rah guys run off anyone who predicted less than 13-3???

Vince,

The reason I disappeared had nothing to do with PR, I'm going thru a divorce, trying to sell a house, working two jobs, and trying to get moved to Florida - I think that'd be enough to keep most folks busy.

JH,

Save the psychology... I've met you remember??? You're a kid, a nice kid, but don't think you can start swimming around in my head - you're out of your league.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Average defensive rank for 1 time winners = #2.5 defense
Average defensive rank for mulit winners = #3.4 defense

What is the rank here, points allowed? Yards allowed. Either way. Those are incredibly telling statistics.

[Bretsky]

The Giants don't get away with anything without the stud DE's. That coach would look like an idiot if he didn't have great talent on the Dline.

Very true ..... but we aren't talking about the Giants coaches; We're talking about the Packers coaches--who presided over an outstanding D on a 13-3/14-4 team. And they did it without DEs as good as the Giants, with OK but not great DTs, with everybody's former favorite whipping boy at MLB, with a very very good, but not exactly all pro--yet anyway weakside OLB, with a strongside OLB that almost everybody sees as sub-standard. with two outstanding, but aging Corners who probably accomplished more good than at any time in their careers, one Safety who is currently everybody's favorite whipping boy, and another Safety who came out of nowhere to play outstanding in the scheme. The backups were pretty much unheralded also.

Why is it so difficult, Bretsky and others, to give credit to the coaches--Sanders and even the damn near unmentionable Schottenheimer--for scheme that brought better defense than expected from the individual players?

I gave a ton of credit to the offensive coaches for covering up a weak interior OL throughout the season. MM with his superior play calling that essentially redesigned the game plans into a pass first happy offense.....and then developed a run offense when teams focused on stopping the pass.

Sanders had a very deep defense; they were not loaded with superstars but they had players good enough to make plays. Sanders is slow to adjust anything; I don't know how anybody could watch the Giants game and not admit this. I hold the Packers players on defense in a higher regard than you IMO....based on your explanation.