Jeff Hafley Packers new DC

[RingoCStarrQB]

I think one of the reasons MLF went young and unproven as opposed to an established vet coach is he wants to create a coaching tree legacy.

Like Holmgren: Gruden, Reid, Mooch, etc. Also Mike Shanahan left a coaching legacy.

Unfortunately for LaFleur, at least so far, he hasn’t been creating one.

Nathaniel Hackett was fired after one year as a HC and now is kind of looked upon as a joke. The punchline being that when Rodgers retires he’ll be out of a job.

Getty was fired from the Bears as OC.

Hopefully Tim Lester will be successful at Iowa.

Can’t think of anyone else off the top of my head.

MLF is still young and if he wins a SB, it will offer opportunities for his staff to advance in their careers and LaFleur will leave his legacy. Let’s hope that happens.

I don't think of Hafley as either young or inexperienced. Respectfully, I don't think creating a legacy is on his mind at all. You create a legacy by having sustained success. IMO the hire is who gives the GBP the best chance to win.

Holmgren's legacy was forever marred with the freakin effen Super Bowl 32 loss. What a shame.

[JKB]

If he turns that around I'm all in. I will say Im not a fan of man coverage or single high. I used to love man but I think NFL offenses and QBs have just gotten too good.

Yes, on the tackling. God God, get that better, please. On man and single high, I agree, but I also disagree with never using it. Have to mix it in. Have to use it situationally. Have to use it if the strengths of your team dictate it or if the weaknesses of the other team dictate it. Just be adaptable.

Yes!
“Be adaptable”
And do not be so damn predictable

[JKB]

If we are going to play man single high would the second safety basically be playing slot CB against spread formations? I feel like the offense would try to iso the weak link and that’d be Savage or Stokes.

Offenses are built on taking advantage of every weak link etc. irregardless of D scheme there are always weak links.

Stokes is a pure cover guy with great speed, never an inside physical guy.

I am not throwing savage out yet. Coaches need to be able To get the most out of their players. He has shown flashes, and we need veteran safeties like we need cheese

[JKB]

I think one of the reasons MLF went young and unproven as opposed to an established vet coach is he wants to create a coaching tree legacy.

Like Holmgren: Gruden, Reid, Mooch, etc. Also Mike Shanahan left a coaching legacy.

Unfortunately for LaFleur, at least so far, he hasn’t been creating one.

Nathaniel Hackett was fired after one year as a HC and now is kind of looked upon as a joke. The punchline being that when Rodgers retires he’ll be out of a job.

Getty was fired from the Bears as OC.

Hopefully Tim Lester will be successful at Iowa.

Can’t think of anyone else off the top of my head.

MLF is still young and if he wins a SB, it will offer opportunities for his staff to advance in their careers and LaFleur will leave his legacy. Let’s hope that happens.

I don't think of Hafley as either young or inexperienced. Respectfully, I don't think creating a legacy is on his mind at all. You create a legacy by having sustained success. IMO the hire is who gives the GBP the best chance to win.

Holmgren's legacy was forever marred with the freakin effen Super Bowl 32 loss. What a shame.

Mike Holmgrens legacy to the rest of the world is not as marred! Lol
Great reputation! Won lots of games. He helped make #4 a HOF

[Foosball]

I think one of the reasons MLF went young and unproven as opposed to an established vet coach is he wants to create a coaching tree legacy.

Like Holmgren: Gruden, Reid, Mooch, etc. Also Mike Shanahan left a coaching legacy.

Unfortunately for LaFleur, at least so far, he hasn’t been creating one.

Nathaniel Hackett was fired after one year as a HC and now is kind of looked upon as a joke. The punchline being that when Rodgers retires he’ll be out of a job.

Getty was fired from the Bears as OC.

Hopefully Tim Lester will be successful at Iowa.

Can’t think of anyone else off the top of my head.

MLF is still young and if he wins a SB, it will offer opportunities for his staff to advance in their careers and LaFleur will leave his legacy. Let’s hope that happens.

I don't think of Hafley as either young or inexperienced. Respectfully, I don't think creating a legacy is on his mind at all. You create a legacy by having sustained success. IMO the hire is who gives the GBP the best chance to win.

? I never mentioned he was inexperienced. Hafley is not established and proven like Mike Zimmer, wink Martindale, or Leslie Frazier (all are older). He has not called plays in the NFL. He is unproven in the NFL. Hopefully he succeeds and if he does more than likely he will get a head coach opportunity. However, if he fails then the Packers wasted years while on the other side of the ball, the offense is ready to roll now.

What is best for the team’s immediate success?

[Labrev]

The source reporting that we offered to Orr before Hafley is a national source and one who is widely seen as a very credible one, so I am going to take it as true. I mean, if he was good enough to get the job in Baltimore, coaches much think very highly of him.

It is somewhat disappointing to miss out on our top DC choice again, as likely happened with Leonhard.

That said, I feel like Hafley checks more boxes for what I wanted at DC than Orr did, and that there were many more good choices this time than last so it does not sting nearly as much to have to "settle" for Hafley.

I mean last time the only good choice after Leonhard was Evero. This time we interviewed like three other guys who've been hired as DCs.

[RingoCStarrQB]

Hafley favors Cover 1 and 4 down lineman. If he doesn't think he has the personnel he'll have to smartly adapt.

Do the Packers have a Cover 1 defensive back that can be trusted over the course of the season?

[Scott4Pack]

I don't think of Hafley as either young or inexperienced. Respectfully, I don't think creating a legacy is on his mind at all. You create a legacy by having sustained success. IMO the hire is who gives the GBP the best chance to win.

Holmgren's legacy was forever marred with the freakin effen Super Bowl 32 loss. What a shame.

Mike Holmgrens legacy to the rest of the world is not as marred! Lol
Great reputation! Won lots of games. He helped make #4 a HOF

Holmgren actually knew how to scheme a short yardage goal line offense. He would SPREAD out the OLine. The D had to respond in kind. There was always a hole for the RBs to run for a TD. Worked every time. And I don't know a HC/OC who does that any more.

[Pckfn23]

I think one of the reasons MLF went young and unproven as opposed to an established vet coach is he wants to create a coaching tree legacy.

Like Holmgren: Gruden, Reid, Mooch, etc. Also Mike Shanahan left a coaching legacy.

Unfortunately for LaFleur, at least so far, he hasn’t been creating one.

Nathaniel Hackett was fired after one year as a HC and now is kind of looked upon as a joke. The punchline being that when Rodgers retires he’ll be out of a job.

Getty was fired from the Bears as OC.

Hopefully Tim Lester will be successful at Iowa.

Can’t think of anyone else off the top of my head.

MLF is still young and if he wins a SB, it will offer opportunities for his staff to advance in their careers and LaFleur will leave his legacy. Let’s hope that happens.

I don't think of Hafley as either young or inexperienced. Respectfully, I don't think creating a legacy is on his mind at all. You create a legacy by having sustained success. IMO the hire is who gives the GBP the best chance to win.

? I never mentioned he was inexperienced. Hafley is not established and proven like Mike Zimmer, wink Martindale, or Leslie Frazier (all are older). He has not called plays in the NFL. He is unproven in the NFL. Hopefully he succeeds and if he does more than likely he will get a head coach opportunity. However, if he fails then the Packers wasted years while on the other side of the ball, the offense is ready to roll now.

What is best for the team’s immediate success?

Barry was experienced/established... Personally I would have been pissed if we went with Zimmer or Frazier.

[Pckfn23]

The source reporting that we offered to Orr before Hafley is a national source and one who is widely seen as a very credible one, so I am going to take it as true. I mean, if he was good enough to get the job in Baltimore, coaches much think very highly of him.

It is somewhat disappointing to miss out on our top DC choice again, as likely happened with Leonhard.

That said, I feel like Hafley checks more boxes for what I wanted at DC than Orr did, and that there were many more good choices this time than last so it does not sting nearly as much to have to "settle" for Hafley.

I mean last time the only good choice after Leonhard was Evero. This time we interviewed like three other guys who've been hired as DCs.

The source was not national...

[Foosball]

I don't think of Hafley as either young or inexperienced. Respectfully, I don't think creating a legacy is on his mind at all. You create a legacy by having sustained success. IMO the hire is who gives the GBP the best chance to win.

? I never mentioned he was inexperienced. Hafley is not established and proven like Mike Zimmer, wink Martindale, or Leslie Frazier (all are older). He has not called plays in the NFL. He is unproven in the NFL. Hopefully he succeeds and if he does more than likely he will get a head coach opportunity. However, if he fails then the Packers wasted years while on the other side of the ball, the offense is ready to roll now.

What is best for the team’s immediate success?

Barry was experienced/established... Personally I would have been pissed if we went with Zimmer or Frazier.

Barry was not proven to be successful. Quite the opposite

[TheSkeptic]

All in all, he can't be worse than Barry. Can he? Optimistic that at the very least we'll see more attacking style and more turnovers.

Actually he (and any of the other alternatives ) could be worse. Barry was halfway decent at the end of the season and the Boys game although we don't know whether it was because MFL read him the riot act or his own doing.

But I totally agree on attacking and more turnovers. Whether a D allows a score on 3 plays or 12 makes no difference. Forcing a punt makes a difference but then your O often has 80 yards to score. Getting a turnover and giving the O a short field makes a big difference. A Defense can be 32nd in the league in every other stat but if they are 1st in turnovers the team is going to win a lot of games.

[APB]

Any word since Hafley's hiring regarding the rest of the defensive staff? Is he bringing in any of his own guys?

I’ll answer my own question:

[Yoop]

Any word since Hafley's hiring regarding the rest of the defensive staff? Is he bringing in any of his own guys?

I’ll answer my own question:

Heard you, went looking for this and couldn't find it at Packers.com

Sounds like Montgomery has interviews from several teams, thing is Hafley knows a lot of coaches, and probably wants to also do some coaching interviews, doubt he'll have trouble finding good replacements

[NCF]

[NCF]

[dsr]

The source reporting that we offered to Orr before Hafley is a national source and one who is widely seen as a very credible one, so I am going to take it as true. I mean, if he was good enough to get the job in Baltimore, coaches much think very highly of him.

It is somewhat disappointing to miss out on our top DC choice again, as likely happened with Leonhard.

That said, I feel like Hafley checks more boxes for what I wanted at DC than Orr did, and that there were many more good choices this time than last so it does not sting nearly as much to have to "settle" for Hafley.

I mean last time the only good choice after Leonhard was Evero. This time we interviewed like three other guys who've been hired as DCs.

It seems unlikely that Orr was offered the job. After all, it was on 30th January that the Packers requested to interview him, it was 31st January when Halfley accepted the job, and 1st February when Orr was appointed DC at Baltimore.

When was Orr interviewed? I don't see a window when he could have been. Was he offered the job without an interview? Unlikely. What would be the point? If he couldn't/wouldn't come for an interview because he was going to be offered the Ravens job, then they would know there was no point offering him the Packers job.

[lupedafiasco]

We had no shot in hell at getting Orr. That guy is a Raven through and through. When no one gave him a shot as a player the Ravens did. When he got hurt and no one wanted him as a player they brought him into the organization as an analyst. Then they promoted him every chance they got.

That guy is eternally grateful to that org and that’s the kind of guy you want.

[BF004]

We had no shot in hell at getting Orr. That guy is a Raven through and through. When no one gave him a shot as a player the Ravens did. When he got hurt and no one wanted him as a player they brought him into the organization as an analyst. Then they promoted him every chance they got.

That guy is eternally grateful to that org and that’s the kind of guy you want.

Said the same earlier, about any Baltimore staff. If they were offered DC in Baltimore or Seattle, it was a done deal. Maybe if MacDonald said he’s calling plays and then maybe GB would have made sense.

[Scott4Pack]

We had no shot in hell at getting Orr. That guy is a Raven through and through. When no one gave him a shot as a player the Ravens did. When he got hurt and no one wanted him as a player they brought him into the organization as an analyst. Then they promoted him every chance they got.

That guy is eternally grateful to that org and that’s the kind of guy you want.

Agreed. Nothing short of Harbaugh getting canned and the incoming staff refusing to keep him was going to move Orr from the Ravens.