Packers Huddle

Captain_Ben wrote: ↑

04 Jan 2023 16:09

Scott4Pack wrote: ↑

04 Jan 2023 15:36

Gosh, how many defenses over the years ever had as much talent as the L of D? Not many. And there isn’t such every given year either.

Your right, not many. That being said, I honestly believe that there have been many, many defenses over the years that have wasted great talent because of stupid/overly-complicated schemes and coaching.

me to, the simpler you can keep it the easier it is for new players to adapt and understand it, and in this age of player movement, ya seem to have new players every season.

I relate it like Ford and there better idea thing, to often that better idea is just a more complicated version of the same ol thing, just harder to use, same with the second year version of our last two DC, to often we've seen players making mistakes.

Captain_Ben wrote: ↑

04 Jan 2023 16:09

Scott4Pack wrote: ↑

04 Jan 2023 15:36

Gosh, how many defenses over the years ever had as much talent as the L of D? Not many. And there isn’t such every given year either.

You're right, not many. That being said, I honestly believe that there have been many, many defenses over the years that have wasted great talent because of stupid/overly-complicated schemes and coaching.

Has this been shared yet?

The Packers completely overhauled their defensive structure at the bye week

It’s a breakdown from 24/7sports Daire Carragher of the defensive changes made since the bye week. Good stuff.

APB wrote: ↑

04 Jan 2023 19:21

Has this been shared yet?

The Packers completely overhauled their defensive structure at the bye week

It’s a breakdown from 24/7sports Daire Carragher of the defensive changes made since the bye week. Good stuff.

Careful, this guy was proclaimed a no nothing.

Thanks! I didn't know the tweets were part of a full article.

we rush 5 less, and in cover 6 your locking up 7 in the secondary that only leaves 4 up front, whatever, the extra guy in coverage is helping the pass rush get (coverage) pressures, and forcing errant throws, and finally our DB's are holding on to those pic's.
this first part to me is key, we have good players, they need to play up to that.

Switching up your defensive approach is all well and good but your defense needs to actually start making plays for this whole thing to work.

Green Bay’s defense had 10 interceptions and 6 dropped interceptions before the bye week. They’ve had a league-leading 7 picks without a single dropped interception in the weeks since. It’s immensely difficult to beat a defense which is seizing every single opportunity you give them.

Joe Barry might have already dug his own coaching grave in the first three months of this season. Rest assured, Matt LaFleur and the Packers won’t throw in the dirt just yet. Barry is far from safe right now, but a good performance (and a win) on Sunday night followed by some kind of playoff run might be just enough to keep him in place.

I agree about Barry. While this stretch has been good, there were far too many games prior that were bad. Heck, the Packers might shut out every opponent between now and the Super Bowl and Barry should still be scrutinized and disposition made.

Maybe they aren’t talking about it much yet, but how much of the scheme change was about MLF or somebody else going to Barry and saying, “Listen, I love you brother as a man but this isn’t working. If you are willing to change things, I can keep you here. If not,…”

Scott4Pack wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2023 10:33

I agree about Barry. While this stretch has been good, there were far too many games prior that were bad. Heck, the Packers might shut out every opponent between now and the Super Bowl and Barry should still be scrutinized and disposition made.

Maybe they aren’t talking about it much yet, but how much of the scheme change was about MLF or somebody else going to Barry and saying, “Listen, I love you brother as a man but this isn’t working. If you are willing to change things, I can keep you here. If not,…”

people don't want to say or even think that our players revolted, when in all probability they did, and had been for much of the season, it started with Alexander openly complaining with the first game, and later culminated with the Savage tantrum, in between we saw a decline in play from many other players, then since the bye week we've seen a near 180 turn around from many players, yes the scheme changes have made them more productive as it seems to fit better to there skill sets, but at times prior the players looked confused, frustrated, and disinterested, now there going 110% on every play, I still think there was a players meeting during the bye, and a major topic was Barry's stubbornness to adjust to the ability of his players, the result is a defense we all new was hidden in that chaos.

And now from left field . . .


Conspiracy Theory 23:


Packer defense started to play better the game after Jim Leonard was not hired as HC of the Badgers.

Jim Leonard was a leading candidate for DC when Barry was hired but withdrew from consideration to stay at Wisconsin.

Supposing - Leonard was brought in on the sly to transform the Packer defense?


Not very likely as players or someone would talk about it or reporters would spot him in the area.

Yoop wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2023 11:22

Scott4Pack wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2023 10:33

I agree about Barry. While this stretch has been good, there were far too many games prior that were bad. Heck, the Packers might shut out every opponent between now and the Super Bowl and Barry should still be scrutinized and disposition made.

Maybe they aren’t talking about it much yet, but how much of the scheme change was about MLF or somebody else going to Barry and saying, “Listen, I love you brother as a man but this isn’t working. If you are willing to change things, I can keep you here. If not,…”

people don't want to say or even think that our players revolted, when in all probability they did, and had been for much of the season, it started with Alexander openly complaining with the first game, and later culminated with the Savage tantrum, in between we saw a decline in play from many other players, then since the bye week we've seen a near 180 turn around from many players, yes the scheme changes have made them more productive as it seems to fit better to there skill sets, but at times prior the players looked confused, frustrated, and disinterested, now there going 110% on every play, I still think there was a players meeting during the bye, and a major topic was Barry's stubbornness to adjust to the ability of his players, the result is a defense we all new was hidden in that chaos.

I think [mention]Scott4Pack[/mention]'s scenario is more likely what prompted the change.

I mean, the players were chirping all season and it had zero effect. Then suddenly, during the bye week when the coaching staff does it's self scout, things changed. I'd bet MLF (or higher?) got in that Barry ass and told him to pull his head out of it.

AmishMafia wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2023 12:02

And now from left field . . .


Conspiracy Theory 23:


Packer defense started to play better the game after Jim Leonard was not hired as HC of the Badgers.

Jim Leonard was a leading candidate for DC when Barry was hired but withdrew from consideration to stay at Wisconsin.

Supposing - Leonard was brought in on the sly to transform the Packer defense?


Not very likely as players or someone would talk about it or reporters would spot him in the area.

I resemble the fact that it is #23!

AmishMafia wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2023 12:02

And now from left field . . .


Conspiracy Theory 23:


Packer defense started to play better the game after Jim Leonard was not hired as HC of the Badgers.

Jim Leonard was a leading candidate for DC when Barry was hired but withdrew from consideration to stay at Wisconsin.

Supposing - Leonard was brought in on the sly to transform the Packer defense?


Not very likely as players or someone would talk about it or reporters would spot him in the area.

I'm picturing MLF and Barry receiving Zoom calls from "someone" in an anonymous mask and using a voice-modulator.

"You must mix-up your zone and man, and let Jaire be the enforcer. Slaton is the key."

APB wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2023 12:02

Yoop wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2023 11:22

Scott4Pack wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2023 10:33

I agree about Barry. While this stretch has been good, there were far too many games prior that were bad. Heck, the Packers might shut out every opponent between now and the Super Bowl and Barry should still be scrutinized and disposition made.

Maybe they aren’t talking about it much yet, but how much of the scheme change was about MLF or somebody else going to Barry and saying, “Listen, I love you brother as a man but this isn’t working. If you are willing to change things, I can keep you here. If not,…”

people don't want to say or even think that our players revolted, when in all probability they did, and had been for much of the season, it started with Alexander openly complaining with the first game, and later culminated with the Savage tantrum, in between we saw a decline in play from many other players, then since the bye week we've seen a near 180 turn around from many players, yes the scheme changes have made them more productive as it seems to fit better to there skill sets, but at times prior the players looked confused, frustrated, and disinterested, now there going 110% on every play, I still think there was a players meeting during the bye, and a major topic was Barry's stubbornness to adjust to the ability of his players, the result is a defense we all new was hidden in that chaos.

I think @Scott4Pack's scenario is more likely what prompted the change.

I mean, the players were chirping all season and it had zero effect. Then suddenly, during the bye week when the coaching staff does it's self scout, things changed. I'd bet MLF (or higher?) got in that Barry ass and told him to pull his head out of it.

who knows, but I still think they had a meeting and may have asked Lafluer and Barry both to attend, and what we see now is the hashing out of player complaints, we are seeing a lot more effort from the players, and why would they wait till this late in the season to do what normally is done after the first 4 to 6 games, the bye came to late for the staff to hold in season inventory, if that is the case it's a red mark on Lafleur.

nothing about this makes sense, other then the players forcing Lafleur to finally take action, As Scott said, do we even want Barry back next season, if these changes are the result of players demanding changes I see no reason to bring him back.

and players meetings are more common then most people think, and most of them aren't public knowledge unless a player blabs of it, which obviously breaks that player code of silence

imho we sucked under Barry to long for players not to have a get together.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/141 ... y-meetings

Cris Carter, the NFL Hall of Fame receiver, and Darrelle Revis, the New York Jets' All-Pro cornerback, say a lot of players-only meetings are 50/50 propositions -- they can go either way. Kevin Millar, who played for five major league clubs, including the 2004 World Series champion Boston Red Sox, says players-only meetings happen far more often than the public ever knows. He likens them to "good old-fashioned manhunts" and necessary "maintenance."

Talent or coaching? Always an argument over why a team is performing poorly. Mostly fans blame the talent. I am in the camp of coaching being more important. This is another example. I feel the Packers became less talented with the loss of Gary, but are now playing much better.

If the defense revolves around the democratic process of player input, then why did it take 12 freaking games for Barry to make adjustments, sorry no sale, this to me is a attempt at Barry to save face and keep his job

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/player-inp ... 09408.html

AmishMafia wrote: ↑

06 Jan 2023 07:24

Talent or coaching? Always an argument over why a team is performing poorly. Mostly fans blame the talent. I am in the camp of coaching being more important. This is another example. I feel the Packers became less talented with the loss of Gary, but are now playing much better.

well we sure as hell didn't replace Gary, not even close, we played like crap because Barry's schemes where crap, and finally Barry for some reason changed up his schemes, probably because his players where so frustrated and fed up they called a meeting with Lafluer and forced him to change

since the bye we've seen more spirited play from every position on the defense, major jump in play from Clark, Douglas, Amos, Alexander, and you think coaching did that?

Holy &%$@ are you in a bad mood this week.


We are on a 4 game winning streak and if we win, we are in!

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

06 Jan 2023 08:56

Holy &%$@ are you in a bad mood this week.


We are on a 4 game winning streak and if we win, we are in!

I'am not in a bad mood, I just know when I'am being fed a line of bull, and nothing coming out of Lambeau concerning changes made with this defense seems on the level.

I do like the changes very much, but I'd have liked them even more if they'd have happened 3 months ago.

who new Snoop Dog had a football team that would produce such a fine player?

little history on our returner

https://www.yahoo.com/news/keisean-nixo ... 42364.html

Yoop wrote: ↑

06 Jan 2023 08:50

AmishMafia wrote: ↑

06 Jan 2023 07:24

Talent or coaching? Always an argument over why a team is performing poorly. Mostly fans blame the talent. I am in the camp of coaching being more important. This is another example. I feel the Packers became less talented with the loss of Gary, but are now playing much better.

well we sure as hell didn't replace Gary, not even close, we played like crap because Barry's schemes where crap, and finally Barry for some reason changed up his schemes, probably because his players where so frustrated and fed up they called a meeting with Lafluer and forced him to change

since the bye we've seen more spirited play from every position on the defense, major jump in play from Clark, Douglas, Amos, Alexander, and you think coaching did that?

Sooooo, I post about coaching vrs talent.

You accept my points that talent got worse; we are playing better on defense; and that the only thing that changed is coaching through the scheme.

You reiterated all my points and came to the same conclusion, and yet I "fed you a line of bull".

AmishMafia wrote: ↑

06 Jan 2023 12:43

Yoop wrote: ↑

06 Jan 2023 08:50

AmishMafia wrote: ↑

06 Jan 2023 07:24

Talent or coaching? Always an argument over why a team is performing poorly. Mostly fans blame the talent. I am in the camp of coaching being more important. This is another example. I feel the Packers became less talented with the loss of Gary, but are now playing much better.

well we sure as hell didn't replace Gary, not even close, we played like crap because Barry's schemes where crap, and finally Barry for some reason changed up his schemes, probably because his players where so frustrated and fed up they called a meeting with Lafluer and forced him to change

since the bye we've seen more spirited play from every position on the defense, major jump in play from Clark, Douglas, Amos, Alexander, and you think coaching did that?

Sooooo, I post about coaching vrs talent.

You accept my points that talent got worse; we are playing better on defense; and that the only thing that changed is coaching through the scheme.

You reiterated all my points and came to the same conclusion, and yet I "fed you a line of bull".

no the talent didn't get worse, the scheme they where playing was the problem, the coaching sucked, if it was one or two players that improved, yes then we could assume player decline, but this whole defense is playing better, so no don't come here attempting to twist around what I said, I didn't accept a word you said.