From Lambeau to Lombardi, Holmgren, McCarthy and LaFleur and from Starr to Favre, Rodgers and now Jordan Love we’re talking Super Bowl Champion Green Bay Packers football. This Packers Forum is the place to talk NFL football and everything Packers. So, pull up a keyboard, make yourself at home and let’s talk some Packers football.
When the team went from 12-4 (NFCCG loss) to 10-6 (Div loss) to 10-6 (NFCCG loss) to 7-9 to 6-9-1 in a 5-year period, I can see a strong case for saying "this is a stagnant team, not doing what it takes to break out of mediocrity, with a declining talent base and no shift in strategy to break free from it."
That narrative resonated.
But when Gutey takes over, snags the league's best young CB AND an extra future 1st round pick in his first draft, signs two new EDGE rushers, a top-10 safety, and a versatile OL all of whom wind up playing the best football of their decently young careers in the year or two following the signings, making waiver claims on low-value, low-risk guys like Ervin or Austin throughout the season to attempt to improve obvious weaknesses like the return game, and aggressively tries to fill roster weak spots by drafting 3 WRs, 3 RBs, 6 OL in two years, a NT, two mid-round ILBs, signs a low-risk veteran ILB (who didn't work out), revamps the TE room from top to bottom, and hires a modern offensive coach...
And the result is going from 6-9-1 to 13-3 (NFCCG loss) to 13-3 (NFCCG loss) and people try to say this team isn't doing enough to win??
It’s hard to win a super bowl. Teams can do what they’ve been doing and get booted in the playoffs, or they can say “we may never have a qb this good again, let’s really go for it while we can. Deal with the future later”
Most fan bases appreciate the teams effort to try.
Total bs. Teams appreciate when it works. Had we spent our way into cap hell (which we almost have, actually) to "go all in" and still failed, fans would be just as upset that we failed. If we were kicking the can down the road and failing, fans would complain about that no less than if we seem to be going a more developmental, slow-and-steady rate toward our failure.
This is a team that did not have a winning record in 2017 or 2018 that hired a new GM in that period to turn that around, a new coach afterward, and immediately finished "ahead of schedule" with a 13-3 NFCCG appearance in '19 and repeated that performance, looking like a more impressive team in 2020. This is a team that brought in tons of free agents in that time period and extended their own Pro Bowlers. This is a team that has acquired one Pro Bowl player per year under the new GM (3 in 3 years) and retained the same number of them (3 contract extensions for Pro Bowlers in 3 years). We ARE going all in. When you go all in and fail, people complain that you aren't all-in enough. It's Super Bowl or bust for those fans. They'll complain no matter which way you try to frame it.
Anyway, I'm excited about this rookie class and their interviews were all pretty great and I wish that our OL had a really legit RT of the future on it.
just trying to follow along here,
1. Atlanta just did what you claim teams should do, building team prior to finding a new QB, they can hope to play better on offense keeping Ryan and adding impact players, then maybe next year or the one after find a QB to replace Ryan.
granted we are a built team, near complete, so the situation is a little different.
Pitts though is a generational talent, highest TE drafted ever, so for you to think Atlanta screwed up is shocking to me
After restructuring Matt Ryan’s contract and the team using multiple picks to build up the offensive line, it is reasonable to believe that Pitts was always the top choice for Atlanta.
Last edited by Yoop on 17 May 2021 16:24, edited 1 time in total.
When the team went from 12-4 (NFCCG loss) to 10-6 (Div loss) to 10-6 (NFCCG loss) to 7-9 to 6-9-1 in a 5-year period, I can see a strong case for saying "this is a stagnant team, not doing what it takes to break out of mediocrity, with a declining talent base and no shift in strategy to break free from it."
That narrative resonated.
But when Gutey takes over, snags the league's best young CB AND an extra future 1st round pick in his first draft, signs two new EDGE rushers, a top-10 safety, and a versatile OL all of whom wind up playing the best football of their decently young careers in the year or two following the signings, making waiver claims on low-value, low-risk guys like Ervin or Austin throughout the season to attempt to improve obvious weaknesses like the return game, and aggressively tries to fill roster weak spots by drafting 3 WRs, 3 RBs, 6 OL in two years, a NT, two mid-round ILBs, signs a low-risk veteran ILB (who didn't work out), revamps the TE room from top to bottom, and hires a modern offensive coach...
And the result is going from 6-9-1 to 13-3 (NFCCG loss) to 13-3 (NFCCG loss) and people try to say this team isn't doing enough to win??
After restructuring Matt Ryan’s contract and the team using multiple picks to build up the offensive line, it is reasonable to believe that Pitts was always the top choice for Atlanta.
I predict that the Falcons are borderline playoff teams for the next three years and then go looking for a new QB without having ever challenged for the title. No matter how Pitts turns out, that means the team relied on an antiquated version of reality and missed a prime change to improve their prospects toward a championship by skipping out on Fields when they had the opportunity, yes.
After restructuring Matt Ryan’s contract and the team using multiple picks to build up the offensive line, it is reasonable to believe that Pitts was always the top choice for Atlanta.
I predict that the Falcons are borderline playoff teams for the next three years and then go looking for a new QB without having ever challenged for the title. No matter how Pitts turns out, that means the team relied on an antiquated version of reality and missed a prime change to improve their prospects toward a championship by skipping out on Fields when they had the opportunity, yes.
fields could be a bust, in fact the odds are that he will be, Pitts though is likely to be a PB player, even all pro.
the point is that Ryan is more ready now and probably will be the best QB option the team has in the next 3 years, antiquated, that must be how you feel about Rodgers then, and Love is our Fields, why you put such high stock in a position that has such a high fail rate over proven talent doesn't make sense to me.
imo the time to take a replacement for a aging player is one maybe two years prior, not when your QB has 3 or more years of high level play left in him, as is the case with both Rodgers and Ryan, I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.
When the team went from 12-4 (NFCCG loss) to 10-6 (Div loss) to 10-6 (NFCCG loss) to 7-9 to 6-9-1 in a 5-year period, I can see a strong case for saying "this is a stagnant team, not doing what it takes to break out of mediocrity, with a declining talent base and no shift in strategy to break free from it."
That narrative resonated.
But when Gutey takes over, snags the league's best young CB AND an extra future 1st round pick in his first draft, signs two new EDGE rushers, a top-10 safety, and a versatile OL all of whom wind up playing the best football of their decently young careers in the year or two following the signings, making waiver claims on low-value, low-risk guys like Ervin or Austin throughout the season to attempt to improve obvious weaknesses like the return game, and aggressively tries to fill roster weak spots by drafting 3 WRs, 3 RBs, 6 OL in two years, a NT, two mid-round ILBs, signs a low-risk veteran ILB (who didn't work out), revamps the TE room from top to bottom, and hires a modern offensive coach...
And the result is going from 6-9-1 to 13-3 (NFCCG loss) to 13-3 (NFCCG loss) and people try to say this team isn't doing enough to win??
Trying to win the Super Bowl is what the Bucs did. And shocking, I know, they won the SB.
They went out and stole AB out of FA. A pro bowl level receiver that they could make a 3rd option. They lose their star NT and trade a measly 7th to fill the spot with a veteran. They dont waste their 1st round pick (and 4th for that matter) trading up for a 3rd string QB when they knew they were close.
The Packers are just doing enough. Nothing above and beyond to win.
When the team went from 12-4 (NFCCG loss) to 10-6 (Div loss) to 10-6 (NFCCG loss) to 7-9 to 6-9-1 in a 5-year period, I can see a strong case for saying "this is a stagnant team, not doing what it takes to break out of mediocrity, with a declining talent base and no shift in strategy to break free from it."
That narrative resonated.
But when Gutey takes over, snags the league's best young CB AND an extra future 1st round pick in his first draft, signs two new EDGE rushers, a top-10 safety, and a versatile OL all of whom wind up playing the best football of their decently young careers in the year or two following the signings, making waiver claims on low-value, low-risk guys like Ervin or Austin throughout the season to attempt to improve obvious weaknesses like the return game, and aggressively tries to fill roster weak spots by drafting 3 WRs, 3 RBs, 6 OL in two years, a NT, two mid-round ILBs, signs a low-risk veteran ILB (who didn't work out), revamps the TE room from top to bottom, and hires a modern offensive coach...
And the result is going from 6-9-1 to 13-3 (NFCCG loss) to 13-3 (NFCCG loss) and people try to say this team isn't doing enough to win??
Trying to win the Super Bowl is what the Bucs did. And shocking, I know, they won the SB.
They went out and stole AB out of FA. A pro bowl level receiver that they could make a 3rd option. They lose their star NT and trade a measly 7th to fill the spot with a veteran. They dont waste their 1st round pick (and 4th for that matter) trading up for a 3rd string QB when they knew they were close.
The Packers are just doing enough. Nothing above and beyond to win.
Bucs also got lucky some of their moves worked out. AB was someone no one else wanted to deal with. He could have easily blown up there, but didn't. And everyone lauded the Fournette move, but that was scraping the bottom of the barrel and he ended up having a significant impact in the playoffs.
When the team went from 12-4 (NFCCG loss) to 10-6 (Div loss) to 10-6 (NFCCG loss) to 7-9 to 6-9-1 in a 5-year period, I can see a strong case for saying "this is a stagnant team, not doing what it takes to break out of mediocrity, with a declining talent base and no shift in strategy to break free from it."
That narrative resonated.
But when Gutey takes over, snags the league's best young CB AND an extra future 1st round pick in his first draft, signs two new EDGE rushers, a top-10 safety, and a versatile OL all of whom wind up playing the best football of their decently young careers in the year or two following the signings, making waiver claims on low-value, low-risk guys like Ervin or Austin throughout the season to attempt to improve obvious weaknesses like the return game, and aggressively tries to fill roster weak spots by drafting 3 WRs, 3 RBs, 6 OL in two years, a NT, two mid-round ILBs, signs a low-risk veteran ILB (who didn't work out), revamps the TE room from top to bottom, and hires a modern offensive coach...
And the result is going from 6-9-1 to 13-3 (NFCCG loss) to 13-3 (NFCCG loss) and people try to say this team isn't doing enough to win??
Trying to win the Super Bowl is what the Bucs did. And shocking, I know, they won the SB.
They went out and stole AB out of FA. A pro bowl level receiver that they could make a 3rd option. They lose their star NT and trade a measly 7th to fill the spot with a veteran. They dont waste their 1st round pick (and 4th for that matter) trading up for a 3rd string QB when they knew they were close.
The Packers are just doing enough. Nothing above and beyond to win.
I have actually found the best way to determine which teams "tried to win a SB" is by doing a quick Wikepdia search and looking for "Super Bowl winners" each season.
Like the 2019 49ers were a bunch of clowns. They didn't even try to win a Super Bowl. All they wanted to do was to win enough games to keep those in the Silicon Valley interested and sell tickets. Once you get to the SB....no more tickets to sell. So why go any further on trying to win it all?
And the Packers tried to get Antonio Brown by the way. But Brown said he wanted to play with Tom Brady instead.
And what a terrible move to not trade for Fuller from the Texans. Sure it would have meant he'd never get to actually play a game for us because of the suspension. But it would at least show the Packers tried which we have found always works when we only include the SB winners to support that argument.
2019 Packers, why weren't those the moves? Double standard that relies exclusively on hindsight.
Last edited by Pckfn23 on 18 May 2021 09:18, edited 1 time in total.
Palmy - "Very few have the ability to truly excel regardless of system. For many the system is the difference between being just a guy or an NFL starter. Fact is, everyone is talented at this level."
I am having a really hard time wrapping my head around those saying the Packers screwed Rodgers by not even trying to win a SB when literally Rodgers's last play as a Packer to this point, TO GET TO THE SB, was not trying with a potential lane to the endzone and instead just throwing the ball in the dirt.
I think the fact that you are making fun of someone's spelling is the funniest thing of all.
had nothing to do with spelling, rather the source, and then with your constant attempts to ????? what show that Rodgers is the reason we lose play off games, yet when I say one play, or one player can decide these games you laugh at me, you and others here point out any play that was not perfect as the reason for our loss, typically every game has a bunch of plays a person could point to as well.
lots of these PO games lately come down to who has the ball last, so as I said, one play, by one player often decides the outcome, so to think that player we didn't draft wouldn't or couldn't have made that play doesn't work for me, course I doubt it does for you or anyone else here either, course then you wouldn't be able to blame the loss on Rodgers, or Adams, or etc.
Obviously the Super Bowl winner made the right moves to win it all. The issue is that is only known in hindsight. There are countless teams that made the "right" moves but didn't win it all.
It's a baseless claim to say the Packers neglected the roster the last few years.
Palmy - "Very few have the ability to truly excel regardless of system. For many the system is the difference between being just a guy or an NFL starter. Fact is, everyone is talented at this level."
The problem with the 2020 Packers was not the roster. They had the talent. The problem is that they lacked leadership.
That may sound odd at first, but think about it. Tom Brady in the NFCCG didnt even play great, but he inspired his teammates to play great. From day one, he acted like he had been to a super bowl before and instilled in his team what it takes to get there. Everyday, from the beginning, he was barking at his teammates trying to get them accustomed to the standard of excellence that would be required to win a super bowl.
In the first half of the NFCCG, Tom came out like he had been in that game a million times. He also came out like he had won the game. In the first half, he had a laser focus that he would be earning a trip to the SB. His teammates fed off his laser focus, followed his lead, and elevated their play. Shoot, they made some miracle plays because they were on a mission.
The Packers lack a leader like that to get them over the edge. In the biggest spots, so close to the goal..they get tight. Rodgers forgets to run on 3rd and 8, checks out of run plays because he only trusts himself, and locks in on the only WRs he trusts. Adams drops a pass that he has caught a million times as Rodgers throws it to the wrong side.
Year after year..championship teams have guys that act like they have been there before, while the Packers act like they havent. And in reality..besides Crosby and Rodgers..they havent. Even the coach acted like the lights were too bright. If the young coach cant get the guys laser focused on the mission at hand, it has to be Rodgers. Rodgers has the talent, he has to have the leadership to put the team over the finish line. He lacks this ability, and no one else on the team seems to have it either.
So when we talk about adding players..maybe just bring in an old vet who has been there before. Maybe he can bring that winners mentality to the locker room. It is desperately needed.
And since this is the Rookie camp thread, maybe 2 time national champ Amari Rodgers who has had his biggest games under the brightest lights can bring this spark to the team.
The team will never win unless a leader instills the neccesary mindset into the team. The person to do this should be Rodgers. So far tho, he is apart of the annual choke job that happens when the Packers are so close to their goal, yet so far away.
The problem with the 2020 Packers was not the roster. They had the talent. The problem is that they lacked leadership.
That may sound odd at first, but think about it. Tom Brady in the NFCCG didnt even play great, but he inspired his teammates to play great. From day one, he acted like he had been to a super bowl before and instilled in his team what it takes to get there. Everyday, from the beginning, he was barking at his teammates trying to get them accustomed to the standard of excellence that would be required to win a super bowl.
In the first half of the NFCCG, Tom came out like he had been in that game a million times. He also came out like he had won the game. In the first half, he had a laser focus that he would be earning a trip to the SB. His teammates fed off his laser focus, followed his lead, and elevated their play. Shoot, they made some miracle plays because they were on a mission.
The Packers lack a leader like that to get them over the edge. In the biggest spots, so close to the goal..they get tight. Rodgers forgets to run on 3rd and 8, checks out of run plays because he only trusts himself, and locks in on the only WRs he trusts. Adams drops a pass that he has caught a million times as Rodgers throws it to the wrong side.
Year after year..championship teams have guys that act like they have been there before, while the Packers act like they havent. And in reality..besides Crosby and Rodgers..they havent. Even the coach acted like the lights were too bright. If the young coach cant get the guys laser focused on the mission at hand, it has to be Rodgers. Rodgers has the talent, he has to have the leadership to put the team over the finish line. He lacks this ability, and no one else on the team seems to have it either.
So when we talk about adding players..maybe just bring in an old vet who has been there before. Maybe he can bring that winners mentality to the locker room. It is desperately needed.
And since this is the Rookie camp thread, maybe 2 time national champ Amari Rodgers who has had his biggest games under the brightest lights can bring this spark to the team.
The team will never win unless a leader instills the neccesary mindset into the team. The person to do this should be Rodgers. So far tho, he is apart of the annual choke job that happens when the Packers are so close to their goal, yet so far away.
I was just thinking about this recently and agree with a lot of what you said. A lot of this was hashed out in the transition from McCarthy to LaFleur. Like, how weird is it that Za'Darius Smith and Preston Smith essentially walked into the locker room and either self-declared or were immediately anointed into leadership positions? Adrian Amos, same thing to a lesser extent. I don't think we have that same thing on offense and it starts with the QB's unwillingness to take the reigns. He has never been comfortable in that role and is WAY more lead by example. That works perfect when everything is running smoothly, but, as in the NFCCG, when it's not, there is no accountability on that side of the ball. It needs to come from the QB or HC and I think LaFleur has made it clear he wants it coming from the field, not the sidelines.
Also back to the point of this thread, sounds like Eric Stokes is pretty raw in his technique. He got beat on a TD by a no name WR.
It's early and techniquie is "teachable". But man we really need this guy to not be like every other non-Jaire Alexander and Casey Hayward draft pick this decade.
The problem with the 2020 Packers was not the roster. They had the talent. The problem is that they lacked leadership.
That may sound odd at first, but think about it. Tom Brady in the NFCCG didnt even play great, but he inspired his teammates to play great. From day one, he acted like he had been to a super bowl before and instilled in his team what it takes to get there. Everyday, from the beginning, he was barking at his teammates trying to get them accustomed to the standard of excellence that would be required to win a super bowl.
In the first half of the NFCCG, Tom came out like he had been in that game a million times. He also came out like he had won the game. In the first half, he had a laser focus that he would be earning a trip to the SB. His teammates fed off his laser focus, followed his lead, and elevated their play. Shoot, they made some miracle plays because they were on a mission.
The Packers lack a leader like that to get them over the edge. In the biggest spots, so close to the goal..they get tight. Rodgers forgets to run on 3rd and 8, checks out of run plays because he only trusts himself, and locks in on the only WRs he trusts. Adams drops a pass that he has caught a million times as Rodgers throws it to the wrong side.
Year after year..championship teams have guys that act like they have been there before, while the Packers act like they havent. And in reality..besides Crosby and Rodgers..they havent. Even the coach acted like the lights were too bright. If the young coach cant get the guys laser focused on the mission at hand, it has to be Rodgers. Rodgers has the talent, he has to have the leadership to put the team over the finish line. He lacks this ability, and no one else on the team seems to have it either.
So when we talk about adding players..maybe just bring in an old vet who has been there before. Maybe he can bring that winners mentality to the locker room. It is desperately needed.
And since this is the Rookie camp thread, maybe 2 time national champ Amari Rodgers who has had his biggest games under the brightest lights can bring this spark to the team.
The team will never win unless a leader instills the neccesary mindset into the team. The person to do this should be Rodgers. So far tho, he is apart of the annual choke job that happens when the Packers are so close to their goal, yet so far away.
I was just thinking about this recently and agree with a lot of what you said. A lot of this was hashed out in the transition from McCarthy to LaFleur. Like, how weird is it that Za'Darius Smith and Preston Smith essentially walked into the locker room and either self-declared or were immediately anointed into leadership positions? Adrian Amos, same thing to a lesser extent. I don't think we have that same thing on offense and it starts with the QB's unwillingness to take the reigns. He has never been comfortable in that role and is WAY more lead by example. That works perfect when everything is running smoothly, but, as in the NFCCG, when it's not, there is no accountability on that side of the ball. It needs to come from the QB or HC and I think LaFleur has made it clear he wants it coming from the field, not the sidelines.
Excellent observation about the Smiths. The D was BEGGING for an actual leader. The O is too when things get tight. Rodgers leadership style actually detracts from the goal because everyone is terrified to get a bad look or blamed for a failed conversion.
I look deeper into things than others and draw conclusions...sometimes my theories are silly, sometimes they are right. So on this same line, just look at the entire packers roster. Many of the guys were drafted due to either their production in college (good thing) or just raw measurables that the Packers think they can train into production (not bad either).
But i wager it is good to have some guys "who have been there before". The only player on the roster off the top of my head who has had experience at any level with a team that has held up the trophy is JK Scott from Bama, the kicker Crosby with the Packers, and Rodgers the Qb. 2 of 3 guys that had ever sniffed a championship game were special teamers. Now we have added Amari Rodgers at Clemson, and Stokes has been before but lost.
I cant think of anyone else who has played in those kinds of meaningful games. I think it is helpful to have a few. There is a reason some coaches always draft Bama guys, they know those players know what a standard of excellence is. Maybe Amari can teach the guys something.
Obviously the Super Bowl winner made the right moves to win it all. The issue is that is only known in hindsight. There are countless teams that made the "right" moves but didn't win it all.
It's a baseless claim to say the Packers neglected the roster the last few years.
ya couldn't purposely look more complacent concerning surrounding Rodgers with more ready to play WR then the team has given Rodgers the last half dozen years, impossible, and force him to max out the potential of those we did give him, these are the facts, then when he completely revolts over decisions to stick status quo9 last year Guty breaks down and drafts a slot guy, which is good, but the kid looks more like a RB then a WR, Lupes point may have been a bit over blown, but it sure wasn't baseless.
