It seems that Capers' system works significantly better with a more experienced defense though. Therefore the Packers holding on to their defensive coordinator and Thompson's draft and develop philosophy don't seem to be a great fit.
There's absolutely no doubt it's possible that young players significantly improve during their second and third seasons in the league. It's unrealistic to expect every single one of them to take a leap in 2017 though as it's probable some either stay put or regress next season.
Those numbers are a bit misleading as the Packers defense mostly performs exceptionally well against below average offenses but struggle mightily against good ones. Last season the unit allowed a ludicrous average of 36.9 points against top 15 scoring offenses and while playing better in 2015 still gave up 27.3 points in those contests.
Unfortunateky the Packers mostly face teams like that in the playoffs.
Interestingly Thompson's approach to mostly rely on a draft and develop philosophy resulted in a championship before the new CBA was introduced. At that point the number of offseason, training camp and regular season practices wasn't as limited as it has been over the past six years. Unfortunately the current system makes it tougher for younger players to develop.
I'm not convinced Randall was a well regarded cornerback prospect by anyone else than Thompson.
In my opinion you're putting too much stock into Randall's athletic traits when projecting his development going forward.
You seem to forget that the Packers still had a #1 cornerback in Sam Shields for most of the 2015 season. When he didn't play for four games two seasons ago the defense gave up an average of 28.8 points per game. Unfortunately that weakness hasn't been addressed at all.
Yes, I am not a fan of Dom Capers. I think you make a good point regarding the defense and the new CBA. His scheme is one of the league's most complex and I don't think he's an especially good talent developer. I would like to see him replaced with a better teacher who employs a simpler scheme where young players can play faster without having to think so much.
Obviously you're never going to have every single young player improve. But if TT's is still bringing value as a drafter, the majority of them should improve-- not all into stars necessarily, but into better players than they were last year. If he can't add that value as a GM anymore, then he needs to go. But while he's had his rough class here and there, his track record in the draft is about as good as any active GM's.
I am aware of the discrepancy between good and bad offenses, but the point doesn't change. A lousy defense got the team to within a game of the SB, so it may be exaggeration to say they need dramatic improvement to take that next step into the game itself. Or they could improve dramatically and not get there for other reasons. But most of the commentary I see on this seems to have totally forgotten that we just went to the NFCCG.
Zierlein pegged Randall for the 2nd round and we took him at 30. He said this about him:
Randall is considered undersized for the safety position and some teams have him projected as a cornerback. While he has the speed and athletic traits to transition to cornerback, his cover skills and technique need quite a bit of work to be ready for the NFL level.
It seemed that both he and other teams saw the projection to corner, albeit with the need to develop at that position. That was a pretty standard take on him leading up to that draft-- a FS or CB prospect with man cover skills. Then he tested really well. TT drafts traits more than most, and that generally serves him well.
Athletic traits matter in the NFL and I point them out as one factor to consider. As I've explicitly stated, they guarantee nothing. However, they do highlight that players of his profile in the 1st round have a really strong hit rate. As the numbers cast a potentially positive light on Randall's projection, I expected they'd be disregarded as soon as I posted them.
