THE SOFT Sally's MUST get TOUGHER

[Patler]

Most playoff teams fall into this category. Every year, 12 teams make the playoffs. Since 2002, three teams have won multiple Super Bowls. Giants, Steelers and Patriots.

That Packer Super Bowl win makes all the difference among playoff fodder. Chiefs fans would give their eye teeth for that win.

If someone wants to argue the Packers have not been as good as these franchises, that would be a fair point.

That was the point I was making, the Packers are that team, as are a few other teams, frequent appearances with not a lot to show for it. Perhaps the Packers are at the upper level of that group, with a single SB appearance, but the recent SB win is in danger of becoming the "fart in the wind" that Wolf spoke of regarding his SB team.

The glaring thing about the Packers in recent playoff history, is the number of rather embarrassing losses, games in which they have not competed well and others in which they did compete, but then screwed up in somewhat embarrassing fashion to lose. Then, of course, the first ever playoff loss at Lambeau which turned quickly into multiple playoff losses at Lambeau.

But, that is still better than those teams who make the playoffs only sporadically, and those who make it only rarely.

[Patler]

The Packers need a few more players who are more complete players, guys who are solid in multiple situations. Right now they have too many "specialists", guys who contribute in one phase but give little in another. MM alluded to it last year in the off season when he said he felt they needed to play more base defense and become better at it. When you constantly throw out specialized players and alignments, teams soon learn how to catch you with your pants down. Then, when the opponent rushes well, scrambles well, options well and throws well you can be in big trouble even if the team isn't "great" at any of them.

[mraynrand]

Wilson, Jones, Hawk, Zombo, and Francois all need to be cut outright.

Don't get down on Francois; he's OK on special teams

[KYPack]

The Packers need a few more players who are more complete players, guys who are solid in multiple situations. Right now they have too many "specialists", guys who contribute in one phase but give little in another. MM alluded to it last year in the off season when he said he felt they needed to play more base defense and become better at it. When you constantly throw out specialized players and alignments, teams soon learn how to catch you with your pants down. Then, when the opponent rushes well, scrambles well, options well and throws well you can be in big trouble even if the team isn't "great" at any of them.

Snoopy for forum leader.

All these spec packages blow. Sometimes you see teams with different packages on all 3 downs. Any halfway hip OC will immediately go no huddle. Force the D to keep the same 11 on the field. Then you attack the D's weak sisters in coverage or run, whatever.

I'd get on Wist's ass about Capers and his smallish, "gimmick defenses". The whole league has pass offenses with 3 & 4 receiver sets. They have 'em and use 'em a lot more. If you are going to cover these offenses, you need speed and mobility. The fast and mobile defender tends to be a smaller player. So you are seeing this type of defender hitting the field much more than in the past.

[pbmax]

The Packers need a few more players who are more complete players, guys who are solid in multiple situations. Right now they have too many "specialists", guys who contribute in one phase but give little in another. MM alluded to it last year in the off season when he said he felt they needed to play more base defense and become better at it. When you constantly throw out specialized players and alignments, teams soon learn how to catch you with your pants down. Then, when the opponent rushes well, scrambles well, options well and throws well you can be in big trouble even if the team isn't "great" at any of them.

Agreed. My fear is that big guys on the D line in the draft come at a high bust rate. In this one area, I would prefer T2 copy the Patriots old habit of signing cheap vets to 2 gap and not expect spectacular results and spend the money and draft on much better LBs. In short, I want Vonnie Holiday back.

[Patler]

In short, I want Vonnie Holiday back.

...and you can have him! He signed only a one year deal with Arizona for 2012!

Seriously though, a player the Packers should have kept. Just finished his 15th season. I liked his quote:

DE Vonnie Holliday on re-signing with the Cardinals: “I had no idea that sitting here at 36 years old, in year 15, I'd have this opportunity. So many guys that I came in with aren't playing any more. When I say I'm 36, guys are like ‘Wow.' One guy said: ‘Are you the same Vonnie Holliday I grew up watching?'”

[Patler]

I think the Packers were a conviction (Jolly) and a few unfortunate injuries (Collins, Bishop & Perry) away from being a much better defense.

[woodbuck27]

That was the point I was making, the Packers are that team, as are a few other teams, frequent appearances with not a lot to show for it. Perhaps the Packers are at the upper level of that group, with a single SB appearance, but the recent SB win is in danger of becoming the "fart in the wind" that Wolf spoke of regarding his SB team.

The glaring thing about the Packers in recent playoff history, is the number of rather embarrassing losses, games in which they have not competed well and others in which they did compete, but then screwed up in somewhat embarrassing fashion to lose. Then, of course, the first ever playoff loss at Lambeau which turned quickly into multiple playoff losses at Lambeau.

But, that is still better than those teams who make the playoffs only sporadically, and those who make it only rarely.

"...the recent SB win is in danger of becoming the "fart in the wind" that Wolf spoke of regarding his SB team." Patler

That 1990's Favre led "fart in the wind" team won a Super Bowl and returned the following season to compete for another Super Bowl.

[woodbuck27]

I think the Packers were a conviction (Jolly) and a few unfortunate injuries (Collins, Bishop & Perry) away from being a much better defense.

Add Cullen Jenkins to the above and it appears to me that your likely correct.

[Patler]

"...the recent SB win is in danger of becoming the "fart in the wind" that Wolf spoke of regarding his SB team." Patler

That 1990's Favre led "fart in the wind" team won a Super Bowl and returned the following season to compete for another Super Bowl.

That was Wolf's description of his team, not mine. He said it after their loss in the second SB appearance:

In the locker room that night, Wolf would say unforgettably, "We're a one-year wonder, just a fart in the wind."

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/29487844.html

Ron Wolf - “We're just a fart in the wind. This ought to take care of all that silly dynasty talk.”
http://www.famousquotes.com/author/ron-wolf/

[woodbuck27]

That was Wolf's description of his team, not mine. He said it after their loss in the second SB appearance:

OK then.... Ron Wolf must have made some positive impression with that phrase. Except for the awesome running of 1998 NFL and Super Bowl MVP Terrell Davis. We almost had back to back Super Bowls (1997-98).

[denverYooper]

I think the Packers were a conviction (Jolly) and a few unfortunate injuries (Collins, Bishop & Perry) away from being a much better defense.

Yeah, boy. Jolly would be in his prime years right now and they sure could use him.

[King Friday]

we're not as good as those franchises

The Packers are better than the Giants...even with 1 less SB title in recent years. The Giants have choked on the turkey bone at the end of the regular season just as often as they have made a run in January. The Packers haven't choked on the turkey bone to miss the playoffs recently. The Giants may match up better than the Packers head to head for whatever reason, but they aren't consistently successful as Green Bay has been for over 2 decades.

[swede]

The Packers are better than the Giants...even with 1 less SB title in recent years. The Giants have choked on the turkey bone at the end of the regular season just as often as they have made a run in January. The Packers haven't choked on the turkey bone to miss the playoffs recently. The Giants may match up better than the Packers head to head for whatever reason, but they aren't consistently successful as Green Bay has been for over 2 decades.

Man...that NFC Championship game! How many 3rd downs did Eli convert over Al Harris' hands by a centimeter to a leaping Plaxico Burress with fingertip catches, two toes tapping an inch from OB? I was so upset I looked like a Viking fan.

[RashanGary]

Bigger, faster, meaner. . . .


I agree, on all counts. To make it a little less vague, I'd say we need to be bigger, faster, meaner in the middle of our back 7.


Burnett, MD Jennings, AJ Hawk and Brad Jones are your who's who among ho-hum players in the NFL. Not one guy is even good, let alone great. They range from average (Hawk) to below average (Burnett, Jones) to bad (McMillan.)

I actually like Hawk more than any of that shit-list and I'm not a Hawk fan at all. At least he doesn't flat out miss tackles, although he play slow and on his heels in space. Bishop is a good player. He'll help. At the end of the day though, we need more speed an better tackling in the middle of our defense. A star safety would be ideal. If we can't get that, a safety better than MD Jennings and a star ILB opposite Bishop would be the other option.

If we can't run like the wind and tackle, we're all but fucked. Our defense played slow but worse than that, it didn't tackle and didn't have a difference maker who could clean up against the premier weapons. Obviously your DL is important, but you need at least one star inside player who can flow to the ball and finish like demon summoned straight from hell. The closest thing we had to that was an average LB that plays on his heels. When AJ Hawk is your best inside player, you are fucked. It's plain and simple.

Put Patrick Willis on this defense and we're an excellent defense. The way it is, we'll get gobbled alive by talented offenses.


A star opposite Matthews would be another option. That would be a completely different animal though. Adding some star power to the middle of our defense would make us a much, much better defense in the conventional way (see SF/SEA). Adding a star OLB would make us more of a unique type defense, with extreme power up front and a back end that would just be flat out lucky to be on the field with the guys in front of them (similar to the Giants when they're healthy)