Lockout - an advantage for the SB Champs?

[Patler]

It is often mentioned that the SB Champs have difficulties the following season resulting from burnout. Obviously, their season goes weeks longer than just a few other teams and two weeks longer than all but one. Then, they have the hoopla of being the champs, appearances, White House visits, etc. Those are mixed with personal workouts, mandatory camps and voluntary camps. All of that is compressed into just a few months. The winners have little time to relax before training camp starts for the next season.

The Packers have been "spared" from much of that. Some appearances individually, nothing as a team. No off season training programs or camps in GB.

When 2011 starts, will the Packers be a fresher team than a typical SB champ is?

[HarveyWallbangers]

I think another advantage is that teams aren't going to have the time to implement their schematic changes to deal with the Packers. I'm sure the coaches have scouted the Packers, but they haven't had time to work with the players to implement it.

[Smeefers]

I think another advantage is that teams aren't going to have the time to implement their schematic changes to deal with the Packers. I'm sure the coaches have scouted the Packers, but they haven't had time to work with the players to implement it.

I don't know about that. Coaches have had more than enough time to watch film on the pack. The only time they coach up the team against a specific other team is the week prior to playing them (normally). During the pre-season stuff, well, that's more working on your game, rather than trying to stop someone else's.

[Guiness]

The team that traditionally does the worst, of course, if the SB losers. They go through the exact same grueling schedule, without the pot of gold at the end. If you don't take that last loss as motivation to move up another notch, you are in trouble. The most recent examples are the Bears and Seahawks.

I think you're correct Patler, the slow off-season will help them. The Pack probably isn't going to change much as far as their systems go, so the missed work won't hurt them that way. Teams that need to figure out what to do about Clay, Wood and that other guy (Rodgers or something?) will miss it more.

There's another thing that doesn't seem to have happened (yet?) and that's the annual raiding of coaches from the SB winner's staff. Is that because of the lockout? I haven't heard of anyone interviewing elsewhere for a coordinator position or anything. Has the lockout spared us that? Coaches are staff, and they're not locked out, could a team request an interview with a Packer coach?

[Patler]

There's another thing that doesn't seem to have happened (yet?) and that's the annual raiding of coaches from the SB winner's staff. Is that because of the lockout? I haven't heard of anyone interviewing elsewhere for a coordinator position or anything. Has the lockout spared us that? Coaches are staff, and they're not locked out, could a team request an interview with a Packer coach?

Teams already have their coaching staffs in place, so I wouldn't expect anything to change now.

The Packers lost one coach, Jimmy Robinson, to the Cowboys where he was named Assistant HC in addition to WRs. coach. That resulted in Edgar Bennett moving from RBs to WRs, and Fontenot taking over RBs for the Packers.

[sharpe1027]

Good points. Considering the high number of key returning players from the SB and all those that return from injury, I think the Packers are sitting pretty good regardless.

[bobblehead]

I'd like to believe that we just had a great draft. In that regard the missed time will hurt us. However, Cobb will still be able to help the return game, Sherrod will likely sit the season either way, and Green is an RB, and those guys tend to plug right in. Some of the versatile guys who are expected to line up in various ways on Offense will get off to slow starts though.

[RashanGary]

I like two of the points made here.

1. Time off after a LONG season
2. Packers are losing very few key players and are keeping the same system on offense and defense. Many teams in flux will be playing catch up. That's worth a few wins right there.

One counter point. . . .

Being away from the football for so long, and just coming off a championship, guys could get lax.

[Joemailman]

In general, I think the established teams will be hurt less by the lockout than the teams in a state of flux. I'd hate to be a team with a new head coach, or a team switching from 4-3 to 3-4 (or vice versa), or a team trying to go with a rookie quarterback. The time off after a long season may help, although MM was going to start the offseason program later this year even if there wasn't a lockout.

[Guiness]

In general, I think the established teams will be hurt less by the lockout than the teams in a state of flux. I'd hate to be a team with a new head coach, or a team switching from 4-3 to 3-4 (or vice versa), or a team trying to go with a rookie quarterback. The time off after a long season may help, although MM was going to start the offseason program later this year even if there wasn't a lockout.

How would you like to be Carolina...new HC, OC and a rookie QB who didn't come from a pro-style system? Oh ya, and they won 2 games last year!

[Guiness]

Teams already have their coaching staffs in place, so I wouldn't expect anything to change now.

The Packers lost one coach, Jimmy Robinson, to the Cowboys where he was named Assistant HC in addition to WRs. coach. That resulted in Edgar Bennett moving from RBs to WRs, and Fontenot taking over RBs for the Packers.

No, I wouldn't expect any more moves, but doesn't it seem like the Packers didn't have their coaching cupboard raided the way other SB winning teams have? Did Darren Perry even get an interview this year?

[MadScientist]

No, I wouldn't expect any more moves, but doesn't it seem like the Packers didn't have their coaching cupboard raided the way other SB winning teams have? Did Darren Perry even get an interview this year?

Unless there is a specific coach that a team is targeting above and beyond anyone else, they are not likely to wait long enough to raid the SB teams coaches. It seems like teams really want their HC and coordinators in place quick, and they don't want to risk waiting and loosing another candidate.

As for the Packers, they may have some advantages with the extended time of, but it will make it a lot harder to get the new guys they depend on for depth ready in time. The UDFA's will be in the worst shape as for making the team. Just think how critical the OTA's were for Shields, and how much trouble the Packers would have been without him. I'm also concerned that they don't seem to be taking things too seriously, like they expect to play at a high level without much prep. If I were MM, the first day in, I'd hand out jerseys with targets on the back to remind the players that as defending champs, everyone will target them.

[Bretsky]

HUGE HUGE advantage to Green Bay and teams like Pittsburg, NE, and Indy who has veteran staffs, veteran players, and established schemes

[Deputy Nutz]

I don't know, on one hand they had a long season with a bunch of football related publicity stuff right after the season. A nice long break helps for sure in this regard. But being a young team this players still need the dicipline of mini camps and OTAs. I don't think this lock out is good for anybody.

[3irty1]

I think the lockout creates a condition where it'll be very hard for teams to improve in general which greatly favors the Packers who are already the best and should show improvement by getting injured players back. The impact of new schemes, coaches, and rookies will be at a minimum this year--one would expect things to be closer to last year than usual.