Packers Huddle

NCF wrote: ↑

10 Jan 2025 15:41

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

10 Jan 2025 15:14

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

10 Jan 2025 14:37

When they say miscommunication, it doesn't mean they made a call and the players got the wrong call or not all the players played the same call.

From what I've listened to, it sounds like the general scenario is that MLF communicated that they didn't need to worry about the spike, so Haffley called the play as if this was the last down.

MLF says the time cutoff for that is 12 seconds, and the Bears had 15, so they should not have been in a final play play call.

But what MLF meant to communicate is that they don't need to worry about the spike if they don't get the first down (because it would be 4th down, and so they cannot spike it). So if they ARE able to get another play off, it would have to be a rushed 4th down play.

So MLF didn't correctly communicate the scenario to Hafley for the call. So Hafley made a call that fit a different scenario. So the defense looked dumb. He meant to communicate that if they can get a stop, there's no spike. He meant to be communicating that preventing a first down is the important thing by saying don't worry about the spike. But he communicated the wrong thing by using an incomplete explanation.


It's not AT ALL an excuse for the bad performance, it is an admission of guilt. They are saying that the communication between coaches at that moment was bad and that is unacceptable and it is on them. So they are taking accountability, but they are being overly broad about it. But from MLF's Monday presser, that seemed pretty clear to me, as he discussed 12 vs 15 seconds, 3rd down and not being able to spike on 4th, etc.

To me, that's the most plausible explanation.

Yep, that makes sense and I hadn't considered that, but now that it is out there, it is almost more infuriating. Like, Hafley was a HC, too. At some point, even if LaFleur is giving him an order, he has to be like, F U, 15 seconds is too much time and I need to make a more aggressive call. It just really paints Hafley in a bad light, IMO. Secondly, there should be a dedicated staff member for all things clock and he should be the one talking about those points TO LaFleur and the whole staff.

Lupe made a great point, we took a time out, and this is what the outcome was, right, we have 5 defensive coaches assigned to some aspect of pass coverage, and they had 30 seconds to get set up right, again, this should end up a training seminar on last play defensive tactics of what not to do.

APB wrote: ↑

06 Jan 2025 11:46

A sentiment I believe to be universally shared among the fanbase.

I think you could lodge a similar complaint about the offense, too. There's just isn't a killer instinct personality in the building.

It does feel that way.

zbeaster wrote: ↑

10 Jan 2025 17:03

APB wrote: ↑

06 Jan 2025 11:46

A sentiment I believe to be universally shared among the fanbase.

I think you could lodge a similar complaint about the offense, too. There's just isn't a killer instinct personality in the building.

It does feel that way.

yes, it certainly does at times, and welcome to the forum

NCF wrote: ↑

10 Jan 2025 15:41

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

10 Jan 2025 15:14

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

10 Jan 2025 14:37

When they say miscommunication, it doesn't mean they made a call and the players got the wrong call or not all the players played the same call.

From what I've listened to, it sounds like the general scenario is that MLF communicated that they didn't need to worry about the spike, so Haffley called the play as if this was the last down.

MLF says the time cutoff for that is 12 seconds, and the Bears had 15, so they should not have been in a final play play call.

But what MLF meant to communicate is that they don't need to worry about the spike if they don't get the first down (because it would be 4th down, and so they cannot spike it). So if they ARE able to get another play off, it would have to be a rushed 4th down play.

So MLF didn't correctly communicate the scenario to Hafley for the call. So Hafley made a call that fit a different scenario. So the defense looked dumb. He meant to communicate that if they can get a stop, there's no spike. He meant to be communicating that preventing a first down is the important thing by saying don't worry about the spike. But he communicated the wrong thing by using an incomplete explanation.


It's not AT ALL an excuse for the bad performance, it is an admission of guilt. They are saying that the communication between coaches at that moment was bad and that is unacceptable and it is on them. So they are taking accountability, but they are being overly broad about it. But from MLF's Monday presser, that seemed pretty clear to me, as he discussed 12 vs 15 seconds, 3rd down and not being able to spike on 4th, etc.

To me, that's the most plausible explanation.

Yep, that makes sense and I hadn't considered that, but now that it is out there, it is almost more infuriating. Like, Hafley was a HC, too. At some point, even if LaFleur is giving him an order, he has to be like, F U, 15 seconds is too much time and I need to make a more aggressive call. It just really paints Hafley in a bad light, IMO. Secondly, there should be a dedicated staff member for all things clock and he should be the one talking about those points TO LaFleur and the whole staff.

I hate conspiracy theories, but this very much feels like we gave it away.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

10 Jan 2025 18:25

NCF wrote: ↑

10 Jan 2025 15:41

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

10 Jan 2025 15:14

To me, that's the most plausible explanation.

Yep, that makes sense and I hadn't considered that, but now that it is out there, it is almost more infuriating. Like, Hafley was a HC, too. At some point, even if LaFleur is giving him an order, he has to be like, F U, 15 seconds is too much time and I need to make a more aggressive call. It just really paints Hafley in a bad light, IMO. Secondly, there should be a dedicated staff member for all things clock and he should be the one talking about those points TO LaFleur and the whole staff.

I hate conspiracy theories, but this very much feels like we gave it away.

It truly was one of if not the worst 2:00 of coaching I have ever seen.

go pak go wrote: ↑

10 Jan 2025 20:08

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

10 Jan 2025 18:25

NCF wrote: ↑

10 Jan 2025 15:41

Yep, that makes sense and I hadn't considered that, but now that it is out there, it is almost more infuriating. Like, Hafley was a HC, too. At some point, even if LaFleur is giving him an order, he has to be like, F U, 15 seconds is too much time and I need to make a more aggressive call. It just really paints Hafley in a bad light, IMO. Secondly, there should be a dedicated staff member for all things clock and he should be the one talking about those points TO LaFleur and the whole staff.

I hate conspiracy theories, but this very much feels like we gave it away.

It truly was one of if not the worst 2:00 of coaching I have ever seen.

basically they had 6 months and a 30 second time out, and the outcome was missed communication, come on Coaches, reach down and yank your heads out of your lower unit

I'am told people learn more from mistakes than success, if true, this was a year of learning for sure, cause we've sure made plenty of mistakes, and some cost us games.

I'am rooting for Lafleur to get his wish, a more complete game from all phases, less mistakes, if we do that we can compete with any team

Yoop wrote: ↑

11 Jan 2025 07:27

go pak go wrote: ↑

10 Jan 2025 20:08

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

10 Jan 2025 18:25

I hate conspiracy theories, but this very much feels like we gave it away.

It truly was one of if not the worst 2:00 of coaching I have ever seen.

basically they had 6 months and a 30 second time out, and the outcome was missed communication, come on Coaches, reach down and yank your heads out of your lower unit

I'am told people learn more from mistakes than success, if true, this was a year of learning for sure, cause we've sure made plenty of mistakes, and some cost us games.

I'am rooting for Lafleur to get his wish, a more complete game from all phases, less mistakes, if we do that we can compete with any team

These miscues on the part of the coaching staff are completely avoidable and should not be tolerated by anyone (fans, the front office). Having a coaching staff with their heads partially located where sand is supposed to be pounded will not result in another NFL Championship for the Green Bay (formerly Acme) Packers. The press is way to lenient with LaFleur. Someone needs to smack him around a little bit and rip him about 25 new ones. This is the NFL, which per Jerry Glanville stands for "Not For Long" in this league. Giving LaCoach a 2 year leash beginning in the 2025 season is more than reasonable. The Packers are not a charity. The front office needs to toughen up in Titletown.

Overall, I was pleased with Jeff Hafley's first season as the Defensive Coordinator.

The D was far more aggressive and, other than the game ending gaffe against the Bears in week 18, far better coached than it was under Joe Barry.

The Safety/slot position was much better and has much more talent with McKinney, Williams, and Bullard and should be solid heading into 2025. Oladapo and even Anderson look to be decent depth.

The same optimism applies at Inside linebacker with Walker and Cooper. Behind them, only one of McDuffie and Wilson should be on the roster next season and hopefully Hopper will show us why they used a 3rd round pick on him.

I think between Valentine and Nixon that the Packers have 2 of the 4 CBs a team needs on roster but not a #1. I have lost faith in Jaire, but this being the Packers and given how much the team has invested in him, I won't be shocked to see him return next year. Stokes should and likely will be allowed to walk.

At Edge, Rashan Gary is an above average player and nothing more, even though he is paid like a star. Between Cox and Mosby, they have a couple of #4s or #5s. Unfortunately, if you didn't tell me LVN was the 13th overall pick I'd put him solidly in the Cox-Mosby just a guy bucket. I think it is time to move on from Enagbare. Unless there is a significant infusion of talent, it is hard to see how the pass rush improves in 2025.

As for the interior line, they definitely improved defending the run. As for generating pressure, not so much. Slaton can go. Sadly, Kenny Clark was not good and may be done. Wyatt flashed early but was meh the rest of the year. Brooks and Wooden are just bodies.

Additions at CB, Edge, and the D line and Hafley's D could improve on a promising first season in 2025.

Eric Stokes is done in Green Bay. He took 1 defensive snap yesterday after taking only 5 against Chicago.

Definitely an emphasis of Hafley's and these 2 succeeded with flying colors.

Personally it is why I am not too down on the pass rush. The players were learning how to play good run D and then transition to pass rush. It got better as the season went on.

Gary was much better against the run this season. I have thought that maybe he got the ProBowl nod this year despite not having flashy stats because coaches/peers recognized that he is no longer a 1-dimensional, pass-rush-only player, but now can actually play the run well.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

16 Jan 2025 08:39

image.png

Definitely an emphasis of Hafley's and these 2 succeeded with flying colors.

Personally it is why I am not too down on the pass rush. The players were learning how to play good run D and then transition to pass rush. It got better as the season went on.

agree and was saying that through the season, it's hard to be a real affective pass rusher, and still contain the run, and it takes time to find that balance, which we improved on as the season progressed

Yoop wrote: ↑

16 Jan 2025 09:06

it's hard to be a real affective pass rusher, and still contain the run, and it takes time to find that balance, which we improved on as the season progressed

I disagree. Maybe I would agree if you said it is hard to get sacks and still contain the run, but it's a Step 1/Step 2 thing. They should not have been that ineffective at it. Other than Gary, no one showed any ability to win 1 on 1. I don't think the emphasis on the run was as big of a cause as some think. LVN, specifically, is just a lost soul out there. No idea what he is doing.

The problem is Rebrovich:



We basically have Herman Edwards as our DL coach, smh. Anyway, he is a Barry holdover. Go get your own guy, Jeff!!

I wonder if Maxx Crosby liked working with Andre Carter or Rob Leonard in Vegas. Maybe kill two birds with one stone bringing those guys in. I'd have too look at Carter's time with the Jets and Dolphins to see how that went (thought there was Saleh overlap but looks like I was wrong). Leonard was with the Ravens before Vegas.

NCF wrote: ↑

16 Jan 2025 09:50

Yoop wrote: ↑

16 Jan 2025 09:06

it's hard to be a real affective pass rusher, and still contain the run, and it takes time to find that balance, which we improved on as the season progressed

I disagree. Maybe I would agree if you said it is hard to get sacks and still contain the run, but it's a Step 1/Step 2 thing. They should not have been that ineffective at it. Other than Gary, no one showed any ability to win 1 on 1. I don't think the emphasis on the run was as big of a cause as some think. LVN, specifically, is just a lost soul out there. No idea what he is doing.

They weren't really ineffective as the season wore on. Pass rush did get better. It does take a different set of skills/mindset to be gap sound in the run and then transition to pass. That is just not something have been for last 5, 6, 7 years. The 2019 playoff loss to the 49ers is a perfect example of this. Our front was so unbelievably poor at gap control that it was impossible for the back end to make plays. The 49ers took full advantage of our undisciplined run defense because we couldn't be disciplined. Zadarius Smith continued to rip outside, run up field 4 years and get washed, over and over, and over again. Our Dlinemen We didn't have those skills at the time. Jeff Hafley has remedied that, finally. Now, LVN, he still definite still looked lost.

NCF wrote: ↑

16 Jan 2025 09:50

Yoop wrote: ↑

16 Jan 2025 09:06

it's hard to be a real affective pass rusher, and still contain the run, and it takes time to find that balance, which we improved on as the season progressed

I disagree. Maybe I would agree if you said it is hard to get sacks and still contain the run, but it's a Step 1/Step 2 thing. They should not have been that ineffective at it. Other than Gary, no one showed any ability to win 1 on 1. I don't think the emphasis on the run was as big of a cause as some think. LVN, specifically, is just a lost soul out there. No idea what he is doing.

OK, we all have our opinions on these matters, however, remember one thing, I am not trying to argue, simply trying to convince you that I'am right, which is that rushing the QB, while also containing the run or gap control is not the same thing as chewing bubble gum and walking at the same time, it just ain't, and if your pinning the ears back rushing the QB, then your going to give up contain in that process, seriously NCF it is near impossible not to.

Labrev wrote: ↑

16 Jan 2025 09:57

The problem is Rebrovich:



We basically have Herman Edwards as our DL coach, smh. Anyway, he is a Barry holdover. Go get your own guy, Jeff!!

APB wrote: ↑

16 Jan 2025 18:57

Labrev wrote: ↑

16 Jan 2025 09:57

The problem is Rebrovich:



We basically have Herman Edwards as our DL coach, smh. Anyway, he is a Barry holdover. Go get your own guy, Jeff!!