Robert McGinn end of season breakdown

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

An ideal offseason for me would be signing a T.J Ward type player. He probably won't command any more money than we were/are paying Pickett, Finley, Hawk (before restructuring), or Williams. Signing a guy you know can play to a contract you would already be paying to Nick Collins had to not been injured in 2011 and having a great draft were you hit on like 2 to 3 impact players will move this team back up with the elite. I wouldn't advocate signing more than one or two free agents because you want to be able to keep your Nelson, Cobb, and Shield, type players also. I would love to find another Woodson type signing, a player who makes an impact for 5+ years and is well worth his contact.

[Brandon494]

Same guy who wrote how this team wouldn't lose a beat if Rodgers went down to injury, now the NFL elite are passing the Packers? Give me a fucking break, if we had not lost All-Pro caliber players (Rodgers, Cobb, Matthews) along with others key starters this season we would have been right up top with those "elite teams".

[Brandon494]

An ideal offseason for me would be signing a T.J Ward type player. He probably won't command any more money than we were/are paying Pickett, Finley, Hawk (before restructuring), or Williams. Signing a guy you know can play to a contract you would already be paying to Nick Collins had to not been injured in 2011 and having a great draft were you hit on like 2 to 3 impact players will move this team back up with the elite. I wouldn't advocate signing more than one or two free agents because you want to be able to keep your Nelson, Cobb, and Shield, type players also. I would love to find another Woodson type signing, a player who makes an impact for 5+ years and is well worth his contact.

Although I would love to have TJ Ward I would prefer to have a safety that is more of a ball hawk. A guy who can play center field for us like Nick Collins, unfortunately for us those guys don't just grow on trees. A guy I like that you don't hear his name a lot is Stevie Brown from the Giants http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/13321/stevie-brown but doubt the Giants will let him walk.

[pbmax]

I will say one thing. Our model for backup QB has to change with the new CBA. In the past MM was able to use the QB school in the offseason to develop a backup. Those days are over with the limited time/things you can do in the offseason under the new CBA.

Yep. This.

[bobblehead]

+1
Jenkins was a good fit for the Packers, as was Greg Jennings, regardless of the bad blood now. The defense was better with Desmond Bishop in the middle too. I understand the reasons for letting these guys go, but we didn't really function well without them.

I blame TT for Bishop, Jennings was replaced already on the roster, and Jenkins I still believe signed for same/less than we offered.

[Joemailman]

I blame TT for Bishop, Jennings was replaced already on the roster, and Jenkins I still believe signed for same/less than we offered.

I think TT let Bishop go because he figured he was through health-wise. Bishop played 3 games for Minnesota this year. I think TT was right. It is certainly fair though to blame TT for not adequately replacing Bishop.

[bobblehead]

I think TT let Bishop go because he figured he was through health-wise. Bishop played 3 games for Minnesota this year. I think TT was right. It is certainly fair though to blame TT for not adequately replacing Bishop.

You never know if he would have been hurt here. I get that TT made that choice, but given that Bishop signed a very fair contract to the team, he should have been kept for this year yet. We weren't hurting for cap space. I do understand TT's thinking though.

[call_me_ishmael]

I believe about 2 months ago Bob wrote an article saying something like "MM and TT won't say it, but this was their most talented team yet. Injuries ruined what was to be their most successful season." Now they are dogshit, the league has passed them by, and they better change their ways.

I like Bob, generally speaking. He has a lot of knowledge about the game, and some good sources. I think he gets too much of his ideas for articles from over reacting fans though.

This is a stream of consciousness so bear with me.

It is funny how that works out. I think the team looked a heck of a lot better at the start of the year (not what you want). I think a lot of players showed their true colors and true talent when ARod went out. If a bunch of journeymen looks good with ARod, then no reason not to turn it over and try to get better (worst case, we end up right where we are today - terrible on D).

I would really like to see them just start over there. I would like to see some activity in free agency. Yes, they have some must-resign guys in Jordy and Randall, but they cannot continue having a dynamic offense and horrible D.

Watching the Pats game last night, it is surprising to me how much more aggressive and better they are on defense. They have a high priced QB, use free agency, and draft well. They have a dynamic offense, but there D is leaps and bounds ahead of us. Is it scheme? Is it the aggressiveness of the scheme that creates the perception that it's better? I really don't know. All I know is I'd much rather have that D roster, coaching staff and scheme then ours.

With QBs getting so much money today, it really seems to me like the best window to win a super bowl is to have a good QB on a rookie deal. See Wilson, Kaepernick, Newton, Luck, etc.

Also, ARod is good, but I'm not so sure that he's Brady, Manning or Luck good. Maybe I'm wrong.

[call_me_ishmael]

I think we are better than ANY of them if you take away their starting QB as well, so that is a worthless point to make. And if SF runs the table to the SB and we were <> that close to winning the game twice, do you still believe the other teams are better?

Nope. I think it's still a competitive close game against SF, Carolina and Seattle. I think it's a push or a slight advantage. 60-40% maybe. Where as if you put Flynn in and take Rodgers out it's 10-90% imo.

[call_me_ishmael]

McGinn often panders to the prevailing attitude of Packer fans. After the 2010 SB win and all during 2011, all he did was write about how the Packers were set up to be the dominant team of the NFL for years to come because their plan brought a constant infusion of young talent, which allowed the team to be selective in who of the vets they kept, and by avoiding expensive FAs they eliminated cap-killing mistakes when an FA bombs, as is all too common. Three months ago, their plan and preparation was so solid that even if Rodgers were lost, they would go 11-5. While losing Rodgers would be tough, He wrote:



I still value his draft analysis articles, but those are based on the opinions of others that he does a very good job of gathering and sorting. His articles featuring his own analysis of the team itself are an entirely different thing.

I think the Packers system was really going well after the super bowl. Then our Clay Matthews, Charles Woodson in his Prime, and Nick Collins of the personnel department all left for jobs in KC, Seattle and Oakland. Clearly they had a lot of talent there. I don't follow it much, but it seems unusual to me that the 2nd, 3rd and 4th members of the football organization left for GM jobs. It tells me they had a dynamic, unusually good personal staff.

Our drafting has sucked since the super bowl. Whether it's just bad luck, or what, it doesn't matter. By the Ron Wolf theory, we should have a minimum 3-4 additional quality starters on the team than we do. We don't because of poor drafting. That is the entire problem with the roster in my opinion. We are 3-4 quality starters away from the contending. Not pro bowlers or super stars, just quality average to above average players at their position. That makes 3-4 current starters into back-up depth, which makes the entire roster look better.

I think if we would have continued the pre-2010 success drafting, we would be contending and a dynamic team.

I'm not advocating for free agency, or drafting only, or really stating an opinion at all. My opinion is really that the Packers roster quality has taken a significant dip since the super bowl and it coincides with the massive organizational changing injury to Nick Collins and the departure of the the front line of personnel staff. The bottom line is we need some better players in a hurry and it is unlikely that they will all come in the draft in the next year or two.

[bobblehead]

Nope. I think it's still a competitive close game against SF, Carolina and Seattle. I think it's a push or a slight advantage. 60-40% maybe. Where as if you put Flynn in and take Rodgers out it's 10-90% imo.

If you take out Kap, Cam and Wilson the Packers cruise over any of them.

[pbmax]

+1
Jenkins was a good fit for the Packers, as was Greg Jennings, regardless of the bad blood now. The defense was better with Desmond Bishop in the middle too. I understand the reasons for letting these guys go, but we didn't really function well without them.

Might be better than Jones, but 2011 D puts the lie to Bishop's overall effect on the D. He and the D were good when there were better players around him.

[call_me_ishmael]

If you take out Kap, Cam and Wilson the Packers cruise over any of them.

I disagree. I think they win 6/10 on a good day if we're lucky. I think those teams could easily hold us to less than 20 points. I think our D is soft enough that they could still score. Certainly SF and Seattle. SF has a lot of weapons - I personally don't think Kaepernick is particularly good.

[woodbuck27]

I think the Packers system was really going well after the super bowl. Then our Clay Matthews, Charles Woodson in his Prime, and Nick Collins of the personnel department all left for jobs in KC, Seattle and Oakland. Clearly they had a lot of talent there. I don't follow it much, but it seems unusual to me that the 2nd, 3rd and 4th members of the football organization left for GM jobs. It tells me they had a dynamic, unusually good personal staff.

Our drafting has sucked since the super bowl. Whether it's just bad luck, or what, it doesn't matter. By the Ron Wolf theory, we should have a minimum 3-4 additional quality starters on the team than we do. We don't because of poor drafting. That is the entire problem with the roster in my opinion. We are 3-4 quality starters away from the contending. Not pro bowlers or super stars, just quality average to above average players at their position. That makes 3-4 current starters into back-up depth, which makes the entire roster look better.

I think if we would have continued the pre-2010 success drafting, we would be contending and a dynamic team.

I'm not advocating for free agency, or drafting only, or really stating an opinion at all. My opinion is really that the Packers roster quality has taken a significant dip since the super bowl and it coincides with the massive organizational changing injury to Nick Collins and the departure of the the front line of personnel staff. The bottom line is we need some better players in a hurry and it is unlikely that they will all come in the draft in the next year or two.

Solid post.

[mraynrand]

I personally don't think Kaepernick is particularly good.

LOL