5-10......who ISN'T to blame

[Gunakor]

Offense: Rodgers - he has to prove in crunch time he can be reliable. Right now, he's been a liability. There is little doubt in most packer fans minds that a certain #4 would of pulled out at least a couple of those 4 point losses. Afterall, he was doing that last year for us. Rodgers has to perform better when it matters most. You can't be good most the game and crumble when the team needs you most. Hopefully, this is just inexperience.

I agree with your overall point, but the part in bold is inaccurate. He did it just once last year, if I'm remembering correctly, and that was the Denver OT bomb to Jennings.

He scored the winning TD against Kansas City with just over 3 minutes to go. So maybe you can say there were two times last year, but I don't include this one. It's because, to me, this feels more like the points Rodgers and this offense scores to put us ahead with 5 minutes to go. The ones that give us all hope for victory. The ones that come right before the defense gives the game away about 3 plays later. I honestly believe that if Favre throws that strike to Jennings at Arrowhead THIS year with just over 3 minutes to go, we lose that game 3 plays later.

I can't think of another game that was won or lost in the final 2 minutes last year. The truth is most of those games were won well before the final drive, so it's really not comparable to this year's meltdown.

[Fosco33]

Clearly axing Frost led to more victories :P

Short list:

Rodgers
Woodson
Driver
Jennings
Collins
Kampan
Lee
Nelson
Harris


Mostly not to blame:
Blackmon
Grant
Hawk

Injured, played ok, therefore - blameless:
Jenkins
Bigby
Tauscher
Barnett

Now now, I'm sure at least one of those people you have on your short list was at least partly responsible for the deep completion to Steve Smith at the end of the Panthers game. You have 3 members of our secondary listed there. As well as our defensive backfield has been this season, they are not without blame themselves.

2 probowlers and 1 former who came back from a potentially career ending injury to play very well.

Our D has been mostly aggressive bump/run - which can get them into trouble with miscommunications and one-one coverage. The D scored a lot of points and created enough turnovers to nearly lead the league in points off turnovers.

Every player on a team will in some way be responsible for a bad play, series, half or game. And in many ways, the coaches and management are also responsible. My above list are the players who were least responsible, imo, for the losses and most responsible for the wins.

The talent on our team, including the def secondary, isn't to blame. Scheme, bad breaks, bad calls and breakdowns are more culpable.

[texaspackerbacker]

Crosby directly lost two games. Should we panic and get rid of him?

Rodgers played like an all pro about 90% of the time, but with six games lost by four or less, he had to be primarily responsible for several. Should we give up on him? I bet the Jets would give us back Favre even up for Rodgers.

Grant was sub-par early in the season with injuries and rust when the rest of the team was going pretty good. He probably gets a large part of the blame for at least a game or two. Cut him?

Tramon Williams had his moments, but wasn't it him who got beat by Steve Smith? Either way, he gave up several other game breakers late in the season. Shall we let him go?

Driver, Jennings, etc., just about everybody choked a few away at critical times. You don't lose six by four points of less--several to highly seeded playoff teams if there ain't choking and dropping balls and missed tackles, etc. going on. Maybe we should just tear down the whole team--that's always something the lame-brains like to talk about.

Let's see, that damn Bates/Sanders D scheme--with all the turnovers and points it generated--kept us from losing at least two or three other games. That really screwed up our draft prospects. We could have been up there right behind the Lions if damn Sanders hadn't messed it up with all the pick sixes his scheme brought us. Can him and go zone coverage and blitzing over half the time next season. Then we can really clean up in the 2010 draft.

It's all black and white to you, isn't it Tex?

Changing DC's automatically means we are playing zone coverage? Is Sanders the only guy on the freaking planet that plays press coverage? I mean, couldn't we get another guy who plays press coverage but is a bit more aggressive when this defense needs to bear it's teeth?

I've said this before, so it's getting a tad redundant, but I'll say it one more time. I don't give a shit about the turnovers and the points scored. It's not the defenses job to score points. Their job is to PREVENT THEM. Our defensive scheme is NOT very good at preventing points against even halfway descent offenses. Especially at crunch time. I'd gladly sacrifice 6 TD returns by our defensive backs for 10 fewer points given up per game. Or a 3 and out on the opponents last drive.

And our defense did a damn fine job of preventing points until Barnett got hurt. THAT should be the lesson of this season--that all the Barnett-haters over the years were idiots.

I'm on record saying, I could stand it if the whiners got their way, and Sanders got fired. Just don't change the scheme--which would IMO, be a disastrous step in the wrong direction. Can't you see, the scheme prevented things from being so much worse after the injuries, and in fact, gave the Packers far better defensive performance overall than if we had basically anything else going on than what we did have?

[Gunakor]

Crosby directly lost two games. Should we panic and get rid of him?

Rodgers played like an all pro about 90% of the time, but with six games lost by four or less, he had to be primarily responsible for several. Should we give up on him? I bet the Jets would give us back Favre even up for Rodgers.

Grant was sub-par early in the season with injuries and rust when the rest of the team was going pretty good. He probably gets a large part of the blame for at least a game or two. Cut him?

Tramon Williams had his moments, but wasn't it him who got beat by Steve Smith? Either way, he gave up several other game breakers late in the season. Shall we let him go?

Driver, Jennings, etc., just about everybody choked a few away at critical times. You don't lose six by four points of less--several to highly seeded playoff teams if there ain't choking and dropping balls and missed tackles, etc. going on. Maybe we should just tear down the whole team--that's always something the lame-brains like to talk about.

Let's see, that damn Bates/Sanders D scheme--with all the turnovers and points it generated--kept us from losing at least two or three other games. That really screwed up our draft prospects. We could have been up there right behind the Lions if damn Sanders hadn't messed it up with all the pick sixes his scheme brought us. Can him and go zone coverage and blitzing over half the time next season. Then we can really clean up in the 2010 draft.

It's all black and white to you, isn't it Tex?

Changing DC's automatically means we are playing zone coverage? Is Sanders the only guy on the freaking planet that plays press coverage? I mean, couldn't we get another guy who plays press coverage but is a bit more aggressive when this defense needs to bear it's teeth?

I've said this before, so it's getting a tad redundant, but I'll say it one more time. I don't give a shit about the turnovers and the points scored. It's not the defenses job to score points. Their job is to PREVENT THEM. Our defensive scheme is NOT very good at preventing points against even halfway descent offenses. Especially at crunch time. I'd gladly sacrifice 6 TD returns by our defensive backs for 10 fewer points given up per game. Or a 3 and out on the opponents last drive.

And our defense did a damn fine job of preventing points until Barnett got hurt. THAT should be the lesson of this season--that all the Barnett-haters over the years were idiots.

I'm on record saying, I could stand it if the whiners got their way, and Sanders got fired. Just don't change the scheme--which would IMO, be a disastrous step in the wrong direction. Can't you see, the scheme prevented things from being so much worse after the injuries, and in fact, gave the Packers far better defensive performance overall than if we had basically anything else going on than what we did have?

It's hard to look at a defense ranked in the bottom 25% in the NFL and talk about how much worse it could be. And I don't think it being any worse would have made much of a difference this year anyway.

I'm ready to try something new. Sanders is lucky as hell to have a couple extremely talented players on his defense that make his scheme look better than it is. Get me a DT and a DE and a coordinator that knows how to use the front 7 to effectively and unpredictably get pressure on the QB and stop the run (changes in scheme), while leaving Harris and Woodson in press coverage and the safeties in cover 2 (what we do now). Then I'll be happy.

[texaspackerbacker]

I would agree, getting better pressure on the QB would help a lot--kinda like we did last year when there weren't so many injuries.

I'd like to see us sign Albert Haynesworth, although I'm not sure I'd approve of investing what it would cost. That and the DEs we have would make for an awesome front four pass rush. It also would get us back to some decent run-stopping--assuming we get Barnett back OK. Just having Jenkins back solid, having Jolly play like last year, and having Harrell play injury-free as he has showed a very few brief flashes, would make as much difference as getting Haynesworth.

You talk about Sanders being lucky to have Woodson and Harris. I see it as Woodson and Harris--and the Packers in general--being lucky to have the scheme that maximizes their abilities. I think they'd be pretty average playing in just about any other system.

The key to what you're talking about is that "unpredictability" of the blitzing--few and far between. I'd be for that too.

[Jimx29]

I put 100% of the fault on whoever it was that made the brainiac decision to have the train leave the station.

[SnakeLH2006]

Who isn't to blame...the players....I've dealt with some shitty leaders lately/in the last few years and don't blame the players/employees when the ship is run amok. I blame the leadership...for letting the train leave the station. That says enough. When the train brought you wins and you let it leave and blame that train, and look smug doing so, yes, then blame whomever let that train leave to go 5-10. Blame that guy or guys to let that train leave as it was consistent for 17/18 years till now. Blame that guy/guys.