One Exec "Packers Have Much Work To Do"

[woodbuck27]

"Repped" means that I valued the insight in his post and therefore added "Reputation Points" to his account.

OK Thanks.

[George Cumby]

No idea what you're talking about... I don't care that we overachieved to get a ring. I'll take it... we earned the ring, same as the Giants. We lost 1 player from the front seven, and everyone else returned back to earth... hence, an embarrassing 37-20 asskicking by the Giants.

I think the team that lost 37-20 to the Giants is a more accurate measure of what the Packers are as opposed to a dominant, championship calibur team. We got lucky in '10.

To be sure we have a championship calibur offense, but our defense is just pathetic. I don't know how anyone can conclude anything else... did you watch the games last year?? Good grief, I'm sorry, but the Packers 2011 defense was nothing short of laughable.

Yes, I caught some of the games, and like everyone else, I was dismayed by the D's performance.

However, 15-1 is a pretty dominant TEAM performance.

I disagree that '10 was lucky.

I agree that the D needs work.

I disagree that the sky is falling.

Best wishes for tomorrow.

[smuggler]

Can't be the worst, because Matthews, Bishop, Raji, and Pickett are too good. Those other spots are pretty scary, though, perhaps outside of Hawk.

[wist43]

Can't be the worst, because Matthews, Bishop, Raji, and Pickett are too good. Those other spots are pretty scary, though, perhaps outside of Hawk.

The problem with having so few quality players, so few roster worthy players, is that the front seven isn't made up of 7 players - the front seven is more like 10-12 players deep rotationally... that has to be especially true for an effective 3-4 scheme.

You don't need your base defensive linemen to be pass rushers, but you certainly need your ends to be able to slide inside and take on the role of 3T in a four man line sub package. Also carve out a couple of roster spots for some flexible DL that can contribute to the pass rush (5 TE's?? really??). In our case, we need a competent NT to spell Raji enough to keep him fresh - a fresher Raji instantly improves our interior pressure.

With Raji and Matthews drawing double teams, chips, and whatever manner of extra attention, everybody else is singled up; problem is, none of them can defeat the blocker in front of them. The lack of threat from anyone other than Matthews or Raji negates Matthews and Raji.

And that's before you ever get to a very pedestrian group of Linebackers.

Add it all up, and you have a defense that finished with 29 sacks and next to last in sack percentage. I like Raji and Matthews; and Bishop and Pickett are both NFL calibur players... but that's 4 guys out of a needed 10-12 - and the remainder?? the other 6-8 guys?? They might as well not even be on the roster, that's how bad they are.

It is our woeful lack of players capable of filling rolls in both the base defense and sub packages that has compromised the entire defense. Nevermind that the Packers gave up 63 million yards - for me?? defense always starts with pressure, and the Packers can't generate pressure; they can't rush the passer... no need to even bother trying the evaluate the secondary - no secondary can hold up when under seige like that.

[Lurker64]

First all we aren't going to even draft a WR and 2nd IF Driver was going to be cut TT would
have done so by now. WR and TE are the two positions you will not see us drafting this weekend IMO.

Why wouldn't we draft a WR if he's good value when we pick him? I fully expect at least 2 of the first six picks (1,2,3, and 3 4ths) to be spent on offensive players (notably RBs, WRs, and OL).

And why would Thompson cut Driver during a period in which Driver has no money due? What benefit is there to be had for cutting Driver while he's Dancing with the Stars?

[Brandon494]

Why wouldn't we draft a WR if he's good value when we pick him? I fully expect at least 2 of the first six picks (1,2,3, and 3 4ths) to be spent on offensive players (notably RBs, WRs, and OL).

And why would Thompson cut Driver during a period in which Driver has no money due? What benefit is there to be had for cutting Driver while he's Dancing with the Stars?

Why will we not draft a WR? Maybe because we have the deepest WR core in the league with a talented guy like Gurley on the practice squad. If we do draft a WR it wouldnt be until the 6th or 7th round. As far as cutting Driver TT is not an asshole and would have let Driver go by now to catch on with another team if Driver was not in his plans for next season. This isn't like Clifton where we don't know if he'll be healthy enough to play. We all know Driver still has game even if he has taken a few steps back. I do expect Driver to take a pay cut though which I don't think he'll have a problem doing.

[wist43]

TT will take a WR early in the draft if that's what his board says.

I would actually like to invest in a WR early and let Jennings walk next year. I love Jennings, he's our best WR; but we just threw a big contract at Finley; Rodgers eats up a ton of cap space; we're stacked at the position to begin with; and we have no defense.

Add all that up, and what you get is TT resigning Jennings, drafting a WR at the top of the draft anyway, and letting Raji and/or Matthews walk when their contracts up.

Don't see TT investing any cap space in the front seven... it's all about offense in GB.

[Brandon494]

^ This guy

[pbmax]

wist, hope the surgery is going well. But your numbers earlier point to how evenly Thompson has paid attention to both sides of the ball. 18-15 in favor of O is a deadlock when last year the first three picks were on Offense. If you are within one tilted draft of even, that argues for similar treatment, not favoritism for the offense.

Same with the 6th and 7th round numbers. 13-10 defense is evidence of similar treatment, not favoritism.

There is precious little evidence that Thompson doesn't draft early for defense. There is much more evidence that he doesn't draft well for DL.

[swede]

The food here is bad. And the servings are too small.

[George Cumby]

wist, hope the surgery is going well. But your numbers earlier point to how evenly Thompson has paid attention to both sides of the ball. 18-15 in favor of O is a deadlock when last year the first three picks were on Offense. If you are within one tilted draft of even, that argues for similar treatment, not favoritism for the offense.

Same with the 6th and 7th round numbers. 13-10 defense is evidence of similar treatment, not favoritism.

There is precious little evidence that Thompson doesn't draft early for defense. There is much more evidence that he doesn't draft well for DL.

If I read Wist's argument correctly this is his salient point, no?

In which case, yes, the body of evidence increasingly suggests this.

[George Cumby]

Swede,

What's in your nun's thought balloon?

[George Cumby]

TT will take a WR early in the draft if that's what his board says.

I would actually like to invest in a WR early and let Jennings walk next year. I love Jennings, he's our best WR; but we just threw a big contract at Finley; Rodgers eats up a ton of cap space; we're stacked at the position to begin with; and we have no defense.

Add all that up, and what you get is TT resigning Jennings, drafting a WR at the top of the draft anyway, and letting Raji and/or Matthews walk when their contracts up.

Don't see TT investing any cap space in the front seven... it's all about offense in GB.

Wist posted this whilst under the influence of anesthetia..... anastestia.......anaesthetia..... fuck it, drugs.

[Scott Campbell]

Wist posted this whilst under the influence of anesthetia..... anastestia.......anaesthetia..... fuck it, drugs.

I don't know that I agree with him, but there was solid logic behind his reasons for letting Jennings walk. Once Rodgers gets paid, there will be some tough choices to be made.

[Patler]

I have been arguing the same thing for several years. The Packers will have some very tough decisions to make in the 2 to 4 years ahead. Rodgers will get paid. Matthews almost certainly will get paid. But then you look at Jennings, Finley again, Bulaga, Raji, all will expect top level type contracts for their positions. Lang, maybe Newhouse, Shields, Nelson again perhaps sooner than later will all expect very good contracts, Nelson perhaps moving into the upper group if he performs again as he did last year.

All good teams lose players they would really like to keep. That is what the salary cap is intended to cause.

If you were to pick one to let get away over the next two seasons, Jennings might not be the worst choice if the younger guys show something this year.