Can you honestly see us as making it this year?

Forget Favre

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 28, 2009
Messages
9,115
Reaction score
1,807
It's easy to imagine that we could have made it to the Super Bowl.
But take off the homer blinders and I'm not so sure.
Even if we had beat the 40Whiners, the odds were stacked against us.
Maybe we would have beat The Panthers but we would have lost in Seattle with the team we had.
What do you think?
Where do you think we would have lost before getting to the SB this year if we had beaten the Whiners?
Or do you think that realistically we would be going to NY?
 

El Guapo

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 7, 2011
Messages
6,100
Reaction score
1,580
Location
Land 'O Lakes
To the SB, probably not this past year as you pointed out. Despite the hurt many of you feel because of the Fail Mary game, it's not really that hard to admit that Seattle is a very good team. So were the 49ers. Next year, we have a good chance of making it. As usual it will mostly depend on the development of our draftees from the past few years and any studs that break out in their first seasons from the 2014 draft.
 

Powarun

Big Bay Blues fan
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Messages
2,047
Reaction score
355
Location
Madison
Yep, only as an underdog though. I thought we had the 49ers till Shields was injured then lost confidence thinking Bush will mess up. As for the next two games, yeah, our offense is still one of the top offenses in the NFL. Kind of put us as the Patriots of the NFC.
 

GreenDeath

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 26, 2014
Messages
30
Reaction score
1
Location
North
With limited injuries I feel we can compete with anyone.
We're an elite team in this league without the injuries. We finished 8-7-1 with our franchise quarterback out for nearly half the season. That says something about the caliber of roster we have. Matthews being out killed us as well. I do agree that we can compete with anyone without the injuries, we proved it against the 49ers who were full strength.
 
Last edited:

NOMOFO

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 3, 2014
Messages
1,105
Reaction score
76
We're an elite team in this league without the injuries. We finished 8-7-1 with our franchise quarterback out for nearly half the season. That says something about the caliber of roster we have. Matthews being out killed us as well. I do agree that we can complete with anyone without the injuries, we proved it against the 49ers who were full strength.
yep:tup:
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
I'll say now what I said last preseason...playing in this Division as currently constituted gives us a leg up on making the playoffs. Beyond that, I have a hard time seeing us winning 2 playoff games on the road with this defense which does not look like it's fixable in one off season.

The defensive rebuild-on-the-fly the last 2 seasons has been a disappointment. We'll have to hit on an impact D-Lineman in the first round to compensate for the FA losses, see Perry (or Neal) and D. Jones emerge as at least quasi-impact players, and see Burnett get back to at least where he was at his previous best. Heyward returning to 2012 form would be a plus. We'd probably also need to retain Williams in lieu of committing to House for week 1. That's a lot to ask, considering that the odds are we will lose some players to injury even in a normal season.

The loss of Jennings and Finley put a serious dent in our red zone offense, Lacy's emergence notwithstanding. I'm not seeing solutions to this problem on the roster.

And with all the FAs not likely to be signed, and TTs reluctance to go outside, we'll probably field one of the youngest rosters in the league once again. The team is likely to be too young to make a Super Bowl run.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

NOMOFO

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 3, 2014
Messages
1,105
Reaction score
76
I'll say now what I said last preseason...playing in this Division as currently constituted gives us a leg up on making the playoffs. Beyond that, I have a hard time seeing us winning 3 playoff games on the road with this defense which does not look like it's fixable in one off season.

The defensive rebuild-on-the-fly the last 2 seasons has been a disappointment. We'll have to hit on an impact D-Lineman in the first round to compensate for the FA losses, see Perry (or Neal) and D. Jones emerge as at least quasi-impact players, and see Burnett get back to at least where he was at his previous best. Heyward returning to 2012 form would be a plus. We'd probably also need to retain Williams in lieu of committing to House for week 1. That's a lot to ask, considering that the odds are we will lose some players to injury even in a normal season.

The loss of Jennings and Finley put a serious dent in our red zone offense, Lacy's emergence notwithstanding. I'm not seeing solutions to this problem on the roster.

And with all the FAs not likely to be signed, and TTs reluctance to go outside, we'll probably field one of the youngest rosters in the league once again. The team is likely to be too young to make a Super Bowl run.

Jennings? Seriously? Finley was a blow-yes...but I have no doubt Cobb and Boykins are every bit the player Jennings was. In fact, I would take Cobb over him right now...hands down.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
Jennings? Seriously? Finley was a blow-yes...but I have no doubt Cobb and Boykins are every bit the player Jennings was. In fact, I would take Cobb over him right now...hands down.
Yes, Jennings, seriously.

When he played with a QB who knew what he was doing, Jennings was a threat on the slant, corner fade or back shoulder inside the 10. He was the best route runner on this team. He had to be accounted for in the red zone, and did a fair amount of scoring there. Finley, too, was a threat and had to be accounted for, but the ball went to Jennings far more frequently in close.

I'm the first person I know of, dating back to late 2011, who said Jennings being signed for 2013 was doubtful and that he would not be worth what he's asking. I still believe that to be the case.

And if you think I'm blowing smoke, you'll note I've been early here flagging the issue of the 2015 FA costs as a reason we've been staying well below the cap, as well as an early proponent of dumping Raji, in all cases out in front of the beat writers.

That doesn't mean Jennings wasn't missed in the red zone, as our TD % went from one of the best to one of the worst...at least that was the stat up until Flynn's 4 TD pass day. I doubt we finished above average, though.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
That doesn't mean Jennings wasn't missed in the red zone, as our TD % went from one of the best to one of the worst...at least that was the stat up until Flynn's 4 TD pass day. I doubt we finished above average, though.

We finished the season in 26th in red zone efficiency (TDs only) this season after finishing in the top 7 in each of the previous seasons Rodgers was our starter.
 

El Guapo

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 7, 2011
Messages
6,100
Reaction score
1,580
Location
Land 'O Lakes
That doesn't mean Jennings wasn't missed in the red zone, as our TD % went from one of the best to one of the worst...at least that was the stat up until Flynn's 4 TD pass day. I doubt we finished above average, though.
I agree in general that we missed Jennings, as its essentially a comparison between Jennings and Boykins, the guy who replaced him. However, you can't hold up that stat without eliminating all of the other variables. That stat was more influenced by QBs like Tolzien that would drive down the field and throw INTs or give way to Crosby.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
However, you can't hold up that stat without eliminating all of the other variables. That stat was more influenced by QBs like Tolzien that would drive down the field and throw INTs or give way to Crosby.

Well, we were only tied for 18th when Rodgers got hurt vs. the Bears.
 

Croak

Vincit qui patitur
Moderator
Joined
Aug 15, 2010
Messages
6,478
Reaction score
1,154
Location
New Cumberland, PA
I'll say now what I said last preseason...playing in this Division as currently constituted gives us a leg up on making the playoffs. Beyond that, I have a hard time seeing us winning 3 playoff games on the road with this defense which does not look like it's fixable in one off season.

The defensive rebuild-on-the-fly the last 2 seasons has been a disappointment. We'll have to hit on an impact D-Lineman in the first round to compensate for the FA losses, see Perry (or Neal) and D. Jones emerge as at least quasi-impact players, and see Burnett get back to at least where he was at his previous best. Heyward returning to 2012 form would be a plus. We'd probably also need to retain Williams in lieu of committing to House for week 1. That's a lot to ask, considering that the odds are we will lose some players to injury even in a normal season.

The loss of Jennings and Finley put a serious dent in our red zone offense, Lacy's emergence notwithstanding. I'm not seeing solutions to this problem on the roster.

And with all the FAs not likely to be signed, and TTs reluctance to go outside, we'll probably field one of the youngest rosters in the league once again. The team is likely to be too young to make a Super Bowl run.

I tend to agree with this ^. At the beginning of the season I thought the Packers would be very strong and true contenders for the big show. But when San Francisco dismantled the defense and exposed it's lack of enough strong players I kind of figured even if the Pack did make the playoffs, they wouldn't be on a level with the more talented teams. Then when all the injuries hit and Rodgers went down. I didn't think they'd make the playoffs. Let's face it, they got there because Chicago and Detroit defaulted.
 

NOMOFO

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 3, 2014
Messages
1,105
Reaction score
76
We finished the season in 26th in red zone efficiency (TDs only) this season after finishing in the top 7 in each of the previous seasons Rodgers was our starter.

No Cobb, J-Mike and Rodgers for most of the season, kind of not even debatable that those three being down was "an issue".

I'm not saying Jennings is crap. I think he's a player. I'm just saying that I would rather have Cobb and I bet so would damn near any GM in the NFL if polled. Sooo... that was my point. Getting Cobb into the mix and losing Jennings, it's a wash. Look what Cobb did as soon as he got back on the field. Can you imagine what he'll be able to do once he plays a full season now and him and Rodgers are on the same page?
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
No Cobb, J-Mike and Rodgers for most of the season, kind of not even debatable that those three being down was "an issue".

I'm not saying Jennings is crap. I think he's a player. I'm just saying that I would rather have Cobb and I bet so would damn near any GM in the NFL if polled. Sooo... that was my point. Getting Cobb into the mix and losing Jennings, it's a wash. Look what Cobb did as soon as he got back on the field. Can you imagine what he'll be able to do once he plays a full season now and him and Rodgers are on the same page?

I agree that Cobb is a big part of the Packers offense and a very, very talented guy. He´s not a great red zone threat though, as only five of his 16 TDs have come from within the red zone.
 

NOMOFO

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 3, 2014
Messages
1,105
Reaction score
76
I agree that Cobb is a big part of the Packers offense and a very, very talented guy. He´s not a great red zone threat though, as only five of his 16 TDs have come from within the red zone.

Isn't it just as likely to point out that he's a major threat from inside or outside of the redzone given that 11 out of 16 have come from outside the red-zone? Knowing Cobb's game and having seen him play now, I don't know that I could point to any reason why he wouldn't be good in the red zone. Some stats like that, IMO, can be misleading.

I also think Jones and Nelson are so dialed in with Rodgers that it makes sense they would get more targets down there.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Isn't it just as likely to point out that he's a major threat from inside or outside of the redzone given that 11 out of 16 have come from outside the red-zone? Knowing Cobb's game and having seen him play now, I don't know that I could point to any reason why he wouldn't be good in the red zone. Some stats like that, IMO, can be misleading.

I also think Jones and Nelson are so dialed in with Rodgers that it makes sense they would get more targets down there.

All other receivers are way bigger than Cobb, that´s why they´re better red zone targets than him.
 

NOMOFO

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 3, 2014
Messages
1,105
Reaction score
76
All other receivers are way bigger than Cobb, that´s why they´re better red zone targets than him.

Him and Jennings are pretty damn close...basically the same build and weight but Jennings is 2 inches taller.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
Him and Jennings are pretty damn close...basically the same build and weight but Jennings is 2 inches taller.
Jennings worked the entire route tree, from slot and wideout. You could line him up or motion him anywhere to exploit a matchup. Cobb is still learning his craft; he's primarily a slot receiver.

The point was not whether Cobb will eventually equal or surpass Jennings as an all-around threat. The point was that Cobb is not there yet, and the proof is the putting.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Him and Jennings are pretty damn close...basically the same build and weight but Jennings is 2 inches taller.

Well, I was actually talking about our current receivers as I coukdn't care less about Jennings (though you're right about his size). The reason for his better red zone production was already pointed out by HRE.

The guy we really missed in the red zone is Finley though, and if we want to improve our efficiency there we'd better replace him adequately this offseason.
 

GreenDeath

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 26, 2014
Messages
30
Reaction score
1
Location
North
The guy we really missed in the red zone is Finley though, and if we want to improve our efficiency there we'd better replace him adequately this offseason.

That's a good observation. It seems like everyone has been mentioning every position but TE in terms of need for us. Finley was a devastating loss.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
That's a good observation. It seems like everyone has been mentioning every position but TE in terms of need for us. Finley was a devastating loss.

It will be tough to do it though as are most glaring needs are on defense. I wonder what Bostick will be able to do next season.
 

GreenDeath

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 26, 2014
Messages
30
Reaction score
1
Location
North
It will be tough to do it though as are most glaring needs are on defense. I wonder what Bostick will be able to do next season.
Defense takes the top priority for sure. Bostick will be interesting to watch, he showed promise this season in his very limited action. And it will be interesting to see if we do intend to resign Finley, and how serious we are about it.
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top