A Week 5 Tally On Off-Season Themes

[El Guapo]

Pre-Note: All of my comments are based on observations through four games with full recognition that things can and will change by the end of the season:

1) Injuries - Still a major issue as we've got hamstring injuries everywhere and now Francois out for the season with an Achilles. I'm still not in crucify-the-training-staff mode but I'm starting to drift in that direction after all of these years.

2. Fire Campen - As I always felt, this was a ridiculous statement. The line has done a pretty good job with a rookie and a relative rookie (Barclay) on the book ends. Toss in a vastly improved running game and this group is functioning above expectations. Granted our expectations should be at the Lombardi level but realistic expectations after a massive line swap and young starters were much lower in reality.

3. Cut Crosby - The dude is on fire. After being a staunch defender of him last season, I quickly moved towards the "cut Crosby" camp after his six misses in one day during training camp. That was on top of his horrendous Family Night performance. However, getting Crosby in a sink or swim situation with his contract seems to be all the guy need to get his head on straight. He is perfect on extra points and perfect (9 for 9) on FGs including three in the 40-49 range and his 52 yarder yesterday. One more factor that could be influencing things beyond his contract, may be that he is no longer on kickoff duty. Does his name now change from Missin' Crosby to Macon' Crosby?

4. Fire Capers - The defense hasn't been fantastic by any stretch, but I would say there is a slight improvement over last season. Getting Burnett back helped and hopefully Heyward won't be far behind. We need to corral the injuries though. Fire Capers? No. Keep him on the hot seat? Absolutely.

5. Cut Jerdroppal Paddlehands - Still my favorite name. He's playing pretty well this season, but drops are still an issue as yesterday's game highlighted. Certainly the concussion isn't helpful but I hope he'll start seeing dollar signs in his eyes as we head towards the playoffs.


Am I missing any other major themes from our off-season discussions?

 

[Bus Cook]

Am I missing any other major themes from our off-season discussions?

Fire TT

 

[Oshkoshpackfan]

Cant agree "yet" with #4. The season is still too young, but last year we were better on the pass defense, overall.....right now we were ranked at 28th before the Lions game, and 8th in the rush defense. So, yes and no.....some improvement, yes on the run...but NO on the pass side....but then again we have a dinged up secondary.

 

[GoPGo]

Cant agree "yet" with #4. The season is still too young, but last year we were better on the pass defense, overall.....right now we were ranked at 28th before the Lions game, and 8th in the rush defense. So, yes and no.....some improvement, yes on the run...but NO on the pass side....but then again we have a dinged up secondary.

The most important thing going into the playoffs is being able to run the ball and being able to stop the run. So far, this team is looking poised for a deep playoff run. We are top 5 both offensive and defensively in the running game. In yards per carry we are #2. If this keeps up, I see Rodgers besting Manning in the Super Bowl.

 

[El Guapo]

I hear you on the defense. That's why I said slightly better. With Burnett and Heyward (mostly Burnett) back in the mix I believe that our porous pass defense is back on par with last year, but with an improved rush defense. I'm not busting out the stats, just going with my gut

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Pre-Note: All of my comments are based on observations through four games with full recognition that things can and will change by the end of the season:


5. Cut Jerdroppal Paddlehands - Still my favorite name. He's playing pretty well this season, but drops are still an issue as yesterday's game highlighted. Certainly the concussion isn't helpful but I hope he'll start seeing dollar signs in his eyes as we head towards the playoffs.


Am I missing any other major themes from our off-season discussions?

Pro Football Focus has Finley with only one drop on the year, the first game of the season. While I wish he was perfect, I can't really complain about one dropped pass.

In case someone feels like PFF is wrong, Washington Post doesn't have him among the NFC leaders with two dropped passes so I assume they agree on the one dropped pass. STATS had the Packers as a team with only 3 dropped passes (doesn't include Lions game).

 

[Sunshinepacker]

The most important thing going into the playoffs is being able to run the ball and being able to stop the run. So far, this team is looking poised for a deep playoff run. We are top 5 both offensive and defensively in the running game. In yards per carry we are #2. If this keeps up, I see Rodgers besting Manning in the Super Bowl.

If it's all the same to you I'm hoping that if the Packers make the Super Bowl, somehow the Colts knock Denver out. As much as I like this team so far this year, the Broncos are averaging a ridiculous 46.0 points per game (that's 9 points more per game than the Patriots in their record setting 2007). Now, I don't expect Denver to keep that up but still, I don't really think I'd want to play them.

Oddly enough, as high powered as the Broncos offense is, they only average 0.2 more yards per play than the Packers (6.9 vs 6.7). Main difference is that Denver actually converts red zone opportunities into touchdowns and they're a faster paced team. Denver averages almost 6 touchdowns a game while Green Bay is averaging just over 3. Also goes to show you that a great rushing attack is overrated. Saints are 29th in yards per attempt and Broncos are 18th.

 

[GoPGo]

If it's all the same to you I'm hoping that if the Packers make the Super Bowl, somehow the Colts knock Denver out. As much as I like this team so far this year, the Broncos are averaging a ridiculous 46.0 points per game (that's 9 points more per game than the Patriots in their record setting 2007). Now, I don't expect Denver to keep that up but still, I don't really think I'd want to play them.

Oddly enough, as high powered as the Broncos offense is, they only average 0.2 more yards per play than the Packers (6.9 vs 6.7). Main difference is that Denver actually converts red zone opportunities into touchdowns and they're a faster paced team. Denver averages almost 6 touchdowns a game while Green Bay is averaging just over 3. Also goes to show you that a great rushing attack is overrated. Saints are 29th in yards per attempt and Broncos are 18th.

A great rushing attack is most certainly not overrated. What happened two years ago when we went 15-1? We had no running game and it cost us in the playoffs. As for Denver... who have they played? The best team they've played so far is Dallas, whom they barely beat. If their defense can't do better than that against them, how will they fare against us? I actually like our chances against them, especially as Manning wears down and his age shows later in the season.

 

[Oshkoshpackfan]

Pro Football Focus has Finley with only one drop on the year, the first game of the season. While I wish he was perfect, I can't really complain about one dropped pass.

In case someone feels like PFF is wrong, Washington Post doesn't have him among the NFC leaders with two dropped passes so I assume they agree on the one dropped pass. STATS had the Packers as a team with only 3 dropped passes (doesn't include Lions game).

I don't know what the F*CK "pro football focus" is looking at but they better "focus" better when watching. I have been watching closely, along with 2 of my good friends who come over for game day. Every time he has a "drop" or when he let that one slip right through his hands and go for an INT ....... we all yell " we just got Fin F*ucked". So far, we have yelled that 3 times. So pro football focus is a damn joke.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I don't know what the F*CK "pro football focus" is looking at but they better "focus" better when watching. I have been watching closely, along with 2 of my good friends who come over for game day. Every time he has a "drop" or when he let that one slip right through his hands and go for an INT ....... we all yell " we just got Fin F*ucked". So far, we have yelled that 3 times. So pro football focus is a damn joke.

So STATS is also an F-ng joke too? The official record keeping firm for the NFL? You should probably let them know since player contract incentives are generally based on that.

 

[Oshkoshpackfan]

So STATS is also an F-ng joke too? The official record keeping firm for the NFL? You should probably let them know since player contract incentives are generally based on that.

YUP !!!! Must be .....

 

[Sunshinepacker]

A great rushing attack is most certainly not overrated. What happened two years ago when we went 15-1? We had no running game and it cost us in the playoffs. As for Denver... who have they played? The best team they've played so far is Dallas, whom they barely beat. If their defense can't do better than that against them, how will they fare against us? I actually like our chances against them, especially as Manning wears down and his age shows later in the season.

What happened in 2010 when the Packers ranked 24th in rushing yards and were tied for 25th in yards per attempt?

 

[El Guapo]

Don't forget the magical 2007 season with Favre. We had zero running game yet still one of the best offenses...and were an INT away from a Super Bowl appearance. I'm not heavily discounting a running game but think that there is a time and place for everything. This is a pass-happy league and that will win championships first and foremost. However, you need a running game situationally to run out the clock, win on windy/cold days, etc. Essentially, a run game needs to be effective when you need it but need not be established and displayed all of the time in order to win.

 

[Oshkoshpackfan]

Don't forget the magical 2007 season with Favre. We had zero running game yet still one of the best offenses...and were an INT away from a Super Bowl appearance. I'm not heavily discounting a running game but think that there is a time and place for everything. This is a pass-happy league and that will win championships first and foremost. However, you need a running game situationally to run out the clock, win on windy/cold days, etc. Essentially, a run game needs to be effective when you need it but need not be established and displayed all of the time in order to win.

In 2007, Ryan grant ran for 950+ yards and the rest of the teams runners ran ok....for a team total of 1,597 yards rushing. Almost 1600 yards on the turf is not "zero" run game IMO. We just ran poorly when it counted the most.

 

[HyponGrey]

YUP !!!! Must be .....

Or we're overly sensitive to anything Finley doesn't catch.

 

[Oshkoshpackfan]

Or we're overly sensitive to anything Finley doesn't catch.

That is correct.....

 

[El Guapo]

In 2007, Ryan grant ran for 950+ yards and the rest of the teams runners ran ok....for a team total of 1,597 yards rushing. Almost 1600 yards on the turf is not "zero" run game IMO. We just ran poorly when it counted the most.

I should have been more specific, as I referring to the beginning of the season before Grant became the starter. We went 5-1 without any running game, and the other running backs were terrible. Okay is overly kind.

What is worth noting is that we went 5-1 with ZERO running game to start the season and 8-2 to finish the season with a really good running game. You'd have to chalk it up to having the elite QB in Favre (just like we've got now with Rodgers) that made the offense work no matter what.

 

[Oshkoshpackfan]

I should have been more specific, as I referring to the beginning of the season before Grant became the starter. We went 5-1 without any running game, and the other running backs were terrible. Okay is overly kind.

What is worth noting is that we went 5-1 with ZERO running game to start the season and 8-2 to finish the season with a really good running game. You'd have to chalk it up to having the elite QB in Favre (just like we've got now with Rodgers) that made the offense work no matter what.

LOL...OK...I got your meaning now. 1st time I have ever been convicted of being "overly kind" ...good one sir

 

[TJV]

Good idea for a thread, El Guapo. BTW, the other reason it’s important for the Packers to have a running game is to counter Ds that dare the Packers to run and keep their safeties in deep coverage for most of the game.

McGinn wrote a preview article back in September. http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/packers-make-big-change-in-roster-b9986677z1-222751031.html He begins by recounting the continuity of the Packers organization and notes that of the 14 new players on the roster this year only Seneca Wallace has played in a regular-season game for another team. So if they haven’t made any significant changes, why should Packers fans have reason for optimism? Here’s McGinn’s answer:

They're a much bigger football team than in the last two years, and they've made it an organizational objective to be a more physical team.

The article quotes Ron Wolf, “"It is a big man's game no matter how many times people try to prove otherwise. The one thing I always attempted to subscribe to during my tenure with the Packers was size." Wolf then quotes Tom Landry who said if you make exceptions, pretty soon you have a team of exceptions.

McGinn says Thompson’s teams have usually have had good size but he started making exceptions in the 2011 draft. He cites TE DJ Williams and ILB DJ Smith as examples and DE Jerel Worthy, DL Mike Daniels, and S Jerron McMillian in the 2012 as further examples of undersized players.

We’ve read and heard questions about the Packers’ toughness and McGinn makes the argument they began to address that issue last winter. I don’t agree with all his examples but I don’t think there’s a question the Packers have gotten bigger and tougher on D. Capers has a lot of options on the DL and McGinn notes their 7-man DL may be the heaviest in the league (Datone is the lightest at 295). Behind them the Packers have definitely gotten bigger. Even before Clay’s injury, Mike Neal was getting more snaps standing up than with his hand on the ground and he’s huge for the position. Even backup Mulumba is bigger than their previous backup LBs.

As McGinn says you can’t get bigger at every position in one off season. Their OTs are small by league standards and Burnett is the only decent sized safety. Even so, McGinn concludes with:

Call them the same-old Packers at your peril. The transformation from small team to big team should start paying large dividends this season.

Thompson gets criticism for not being more of a player in free agency and I too wish he would be a little more active. For example, I would have liked to see a UFA safety brought in and I would have been willing to give up the upside on either Banjo or McMillian as part of the price. And I’m not talking about a cap busting star but rather an experienced vet who could have challenged for the second safety spot. But I agree with McGinn: I see a different MO in the building of this team. I hope it continues and BTW, we will see another test of how the Packers stack up against a tough team this Sunday.

 

[12theTruth]

Thompson gets criticism for not being more of a player in free agency and I too wish he would be a little more active. For example, I would have liked to see a UFA safety brought in and I would have been willing to give up the upside on either Banjo or McMillian as part of the price. And I’m not talking about a cap busting star but rather an experienced vet who could have challenged for the second safety spot. But I agree with McGinn: I see a different MO in the building of this team. I hope it continues and BTW, we will see another test of how the Packers stack up against a tough team this Sunday.

McMillian has upside? More like backside in the way of getting his backside handed to him all too frequently.

 

[HyponGrey]

I don't want bigger Safeties. Give me Earl Thomas over Taylor Mays every day of the week and thrice on Sunday.

 

[GoPGo]

What happened in 2010 when the Packers ranked 24th in rushing yards and were tied for 25th in yards per attempt?

We ran much better late in the season and in the playoffs. We didn't do that in 2011 and the result wasn't the same.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Good idea for a thread, El Guapo. BTW, the other reason it’s important for the Packers to have a running game is to counter Ds that dare the Packers to run and keep their safeties in deep coverage for most of the game.

McGinn wrote a preview article back in September. http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/packers-make-big-change-in-roster-b9986677z1-222751031.html He begins by recounting the continuity of the Packers organization and notes that of the 14 new players on the roster this year only Seneca Wallace has played in a regular-season game for another team. So if they haven’t made any significant changes, why should Packers fans have reason for optimism? Here’s McGinn’s answer: The article quotes Ron Wolf, “"It is a big man's game no matter how many times people try to prove otherwise. The one thing I always attempted to subscribe to during my tenure with the Packers was size." Wolf then quotes Tom Landry who said if you make exceptions, pretty soon you have a team of exceptions.

McGinn says Thompson’s teams have usually have had good size but he started making exceptions in the 2011 draft. He cites TE DJ Williams and ILB DJ Smith as examples and DE Jerel Worthy, DL Mike Daniels, and S Jerron McMillian in the 2012 as further examples of undersized players.

We’ve read and heard questions about the Packers’ toughness and McGinn makes the argument they began to address that issue last winter. I don’t agree with all his examples but I don’t think there’s a question the Packers have gotten bigger and tougher on D. Capers has a lot of options on the DL and McGinn notes their 7-man DL may be the heaviest in the league (Datone is the lightest at 295). Behind them the Packers have definitely gotten bigger. Even before Clay’s injury, Mike Neal was getting more snaps standing up than with his hand on the ground and he’s huge for the position. Even backup Mulumba is bigger than their previous backup LBs.

As McGinn says you can’t get bigger at every position in one off season. Their OTs are small by league standards and Burnett is the only decent sized safety. Even so, McGinn concludes with:

Thompson gets criticism for not being more of a player in free agency and I too wish he would be a little more active. For example, I would have liked to see a UFA safety brought in and I would have been willing to give up the upside on either Banjo or McMillian as part of the price. And I’m not talking about a cap busting star but rather an experienced vet who could have challenged for the second safety spot. But I agree with McGinn: I see a different MO in the building of this team. I hope it continues and BTW, we will see another test of how the Packers stack up against a tough team this Sunday.

And yet our #1 draft pick may be the lightest 3-4 DE in the league. He was in the off season when I compared in these pages his Combine weight to that of all the first string 3-4 DEs listed in the ESPN depth charts at the time.

Neal and Jones may be the lightest guys in the league to line up at nickel DT. Capers said they went with Jones because they wanted a rangy guy with more height to move away from the plethora of big bodies; most 3-4 put one of those guys at DE. Before that we tried to sign Canty who fits that profile (who we'll be playing against this week).

Looking at the rest of the draft class, the only guys you would say are bigger than average are Lacy and the two low round receivers...Johnson and Dorsey. The latter two approximate Nelson in size...one would think they want to develop one of these guys as Nelson's replacement if he ditches in FA.

Other than Lacy and Neal when he plays LB, I don't see any particular upgrades to the physical-ness of the team, while 5 of the 6 top picks (Jones, Bakhtiari, Tretter, Franklin and Hyde) are smaller than the NFL average.

A note on the safety position: We'll be playing against Michael Huff this week, one of the cheap vet safeties available with some decent cred. He was high on my list of possible FA pickups, seeing as I viewed safety as an achilles heel. From the little I've seen of him this year, it looks like he might be having a bit of a rough go in Baltimore. We'll get a chance to check out what we missed (or didn't) this week, together with Canty who Thompson tried to land twice in FA.

 

[HyponGrey]

Jones is only 6'4, though he did bulk up to 290. McGinn called him of "Prototypical Size" in one of his interviews with TT. Our OL was actually of moderate size who carried their weight well causing one of the scouts McGinn talked to to say they looked smaller than most NFL OL (I assume like Tampa whose BK line avg'd 330 last year.) Not to mention the McGinn report that Pickett showed up heavier to camp that made me LOL when multiple reports to the contrary peeled out. Capers has always preferred OLB in the 250 range and ILB around 240. Bakh will get bigger as he fills in his anchor and I wouldn't trade Daniels for most DL. Hyde is actually slightly bigger than most nickel backs.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Jones is only 6'4, though he did bulk up to 290. McGinn called him of "Prototypical Size" in one of his interviews with TT. Our OL was actually of moderate size who carried their weight well causing one of the scouts McGinn talked to to say they looked smaller than most NFL OL (I assume like Tampa whose BK line avg'd 330 last year.) Not to mention the McGinn report that Pickett showed up heavier to camp that made me LOL when multiple reports to the contrary peeled out. Capers has always preferred OLB in the 250 range and ILB around 240. Bakh will get bigger as he fills in his anchor and I wouldn't trade Daniels for most DL. Hyde is actually slightly bigger than most nickel backs.

Even taking what you say at face value, there's not much support for the contention that the Packers are bigger and more physical than last season. Let's step away from "face value" for the moment.

As much as I like McGinn's work, he is wrong about 6'4", 290 lb. being a prototypical 3-4 DE. That's on the very low end of the scale. There are few of the breed who go under 300 lbs. based on the weights listed at ESPN.com. With Matthews injured, Neal's time at DT in nickel may be over. Otherwise, Jones/Neal are probably the smallest pair of interior nickel rush men in the league when they actually play there.

Hyde was listed at 6'0", 197 lbs. I would not call that above average for a nickel back.

This team a long way from physical, and not any more than last year once you look past Lacy.

In 2010 we had Jenkins, Bishop, Collins, Woodson (before his shoulder injury) and Williams (before his shoulder injury)...we do not have guys now who bring equivalent physicality to their positions, and THAT 2010 team was regarded as more finesse than physical.

If the D looks more physical I'd say it's being confused with "more coherent".