Do the Packers have the 2nd best roster in the league?

[ivo610]

http://espn.go.com/nfl/insider/stor...seahawks-top-ranking-rosters-all-32-teams-nfl

 

[Vrill]

We are deep, so I'd say yes.

 

[yooperpackfan]

Offensively yes.
Defense? That's the big question mark!

 

[Deleted member 6794]

The Packers feature the best offense in the entire league. I think ranking the Packers second in the league is pretty accurate as there are question marks about the defense and special teams which the offense can overcome on most days though.

 

[paulska]

On paper things look pretty good. That said, on paper we had the horses to do a lot of things we didn't do since the Super Bowl. We're already back into the pre-season, various players commenting that this is the most talent they've ever seen on the roster shlup that comes up every year. Bleh.

I'm optimistic, but not blindly so. While I think we have potential and talent, what we don't know if we have is consistent execution in all phases. Until we have evidence from all three components of our defense (we have serious question marks at all three levels) that things have taken a step forward in where we played last season, I'd be loathe to have any puffy chest feelings. Additionally, the only place I care about finishing first is in the playoffs (see, Snyder, Daniel, multiple time champ of the offseason). Silver medal or something less in any other measurable domain is perfectly fine by me so long as there's a Lombardi trophy to validate that it was good enough.

I think we're far better served taking a posture where we approach the season as if we're unproven (which we are), that we need to demonstrate excellence over time in order to warrant respect from opponents and praise from fans/media (which we do) and bank on the one thing the roster can control: a dedication to execution and improvement week after week. I'd feel a lot better about things if I heard that kind of banter coming out of our camp...

 

[TJV]

[sarcasm]Nope. Can't be. Some Packers fans tells us the only reason Thompson and McCarthy are successful is because of Aaron Rodgers. The rest of the roster is supposed to be crap. [/sarcasm] Is anyone an espn insider and can relay what the article says about the Packers - I can only see what is written about the Seahawks? I'm considering becoming an "insider" and want to see a more relevant example of their work...

 

[El Guapo]

If only these type of non-sense rankings had any bearing on the outcome of the season....although that would mean that we would lose in the Super Bowl, so people would still be upset

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I too could not read what was said about the Packers in the article. Clearly our offense is #1, our roster depth has to be #1 and as mentioned above, our defense and special teams probably statistically pulls us out of the #1 total ranking. Given all of this, if I was unbiased (cough cough) I would take the Packers roster over any other teams.

 

[HardRightEdge]

If the Packers can stay healthy and find a decent ILB and cover corner out of this group of rookies and question marks, why not?

 

[wist43]

We have the best QB, a top-notch receiving corp, and maybe the best offense overall, but defensively we are far too soft - and of course we have Capers as our DC.

We're a perennial playoff team with Rodgers as our QB, but when he was out we went 2-5-1; and our defense is as likely to get run over and blown out as not.

We're a QB driven team, with a seriously flawed approach to playing defense - so, no we don't have the second best personnel in the league.

 

[Carl]

We have the best QB, a top-notch receiving corp, and maybe the best offense overall, but defensively we are far too soft - and of course we have Capers as our DC.

We're a perennial playoff team with Rodgers as our QB, but when he was out we went 2-5-1; and our defense is as likely to get run over and blown out as not.

We're a QB driven team, with a seriously flawed approach to playing defense - so, no we don't have the second best personnel in the league.

The rankings are about the roster. I must have missed the part where coaches were counted as part of a roster.

 

[AmishMafia]

Booger McFarland 2 days ago said the 4 most talented teams were Seattle, cincinnatti, i forget, and the final one is the Vikings. Unbelievable how much love the vikings get for doing so little.

What i loved to hear yesterday is that there is a new attitude at practice. A sense of udgency and focus. I think this will be a tremendous year for the Packers.

 

[AmishMafia]

If only these type of non-sense rankings had any bearing on the outcome of the season....although that would mean that we would lose in the Super Bowl, so people would still be upset

But maybe these rankings are truth and the season is non-sense.

A lot can happen during the season, and just because you are the most tlaented team does not mean you are guaranteed to win. Maybe your odds are 12% and the number 2 team is 11.5%. There is still 88% chance of not winning.

Too many variables, bad calls, injuries, lucky call by opponents, under inflated balls, unfavorable weather (that favors other team), etc. These rankings are merely an opinion on liklihood, and if used as an iron-clad guarantee, well, you would be pretty foolish.

 

[Carl]

Booger McFarland 2 days ago said the 4 most talented teams were Seattle, cincinnatti, i forget, and the final one is the Vikings. Unbelievable how much love the vikings get for doing so little.

What i loved to hear yesterday is that there is a new attitude at practice. A sense of udgency and focus. I think this will be a tremendous year for the Packers.

The Vikings? How did he justify that?

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I have an Insider account and, while I obviously can't copy the article, for those wondering the Packers are ranked where they are because of Rodgers. They note that there are several teams with more overall talent than the Packers but that having "the league's best quarterback" (btw, I like when writers actually take a stand on a ranking and don't cop-out with "one of the best") can cover up a lot of flaws. They note that the main concern for the team remains the middle of the defense with Raji/Guion being huge question marks.

Vikings were ranked 8th in the rankings. Over the final five weeks of the season Bridgewater was actually PFF's top-ranked QB (Rodgers was second). Peterson is another obvious reason for their high rank and PFF also notes that the defense under Mike Zimmer has made huge strides and that Xavier Rhodes has shown signs of being an elite corner.

Detroit was 7th. PFF basically said they still have some elite talent which they've added to in recent years with Golden Tate and Glover Quin in free agency (for those that argue free agency sucks...feel free to ignore those two names) and Ansah and Warford in the draft.

Coming in at 25th is everyone's favorite team, the Bears! Should probably be renamed to the Cubs this season though...PFF notes that the Bear's roster has the look of a team midway through a rebuilding project (which makes sense since that's true).

I would also recommend Insider to those that might be interested. Very little of actual value but COPIOUS articles/kinda-analysis designed to start discussion...though I will note that Insider does have a ton of good content relating to NFL/NBA draft and college football recruiting.

 

[wist43]

The Vikings probably do have a better overall roster than the Packers... I'd imagine if I went thru the league, I'd find several teams that have better overall rosters.

The difference maker is Rodgers. If we did have better overall talent, and weren't so 1-dimensional, we wouldn't have gone 2-5-1 when Rodgers was out; and the only reason that record wasn't 1-6-1 is b/c Flynn came out in the second half against Dallas, and put up Rodgers like numbers.

Our major problem is - as always - defense and Dom Capers.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Dom Capers is terrible. He's awful. According to Football Outsiders, the defense under Capers has only ranked 2nd, 2nd, 25th, 8th, 31st and 16th. That's TWO WHOLE TIMES the defense has been below average!!!! Packers shouldn't stand for that!

 

[Half Empty]

Or, it tends to prove the point for those who cling to Capers' propensity for starting strong and tapering off.

 

[TJV]

It’s one thing to criticize Capers – many of us have done so. In fact, along with others, I’ve posted I’d like to see him go. But it’s another thing to let one’s hatred for Capers be blinding to the point where others point out the mistakes of players (as opposed to scheme) and that’s totally ignored. IMO it’s getting to the point that poster may as well write “I hate Capers” in his signature and post nothing else.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

When evaluating either side of the ball, you really have to look at the big picture; coaches, player development, draft evaluation, injuries, etc. I think coaching is too easy of a target and can't be the only thing looked at.

Unfortunately, IMO our draft evaluation on the defensive side has been average or below for quite awhile. We have suffered more busts then booms on that side of the ball (especially with high picks). Some of this can then be put on player development and coaching of these players once drafted. But I think when you evaluate how well we do with UDFA's and late round picks, our development and coaching does pretty well.

A caveat to all this is.......how do other teams fair with draft evaluation? Probably similar would be my guess. We have really hit the mark on a number of offensive players drafted in the last 10 years, which is why to many people it feels like we aren't hitting the mark in the draft on defense?

 

[Carl]

It’s one thing to criticize Capers – many of us have done so. In fact, along with others, I’ve posted I’d like to see him go. But it’s another thing to let one’s hatred for Capers be blinding to the point where others point out the mistakes of players (as opposed to scheme) and that’s totally ignored. IMO it’s getting to the point that poster may as well write “I hate Capers” in is signature and post nothing else.

It's also another thing for a poster to consistently bring him up and complain about him even when the topics are not even about Capers.

 

[Carl]

It wouldn't surprise me if many others around the league have better overall rosters outside of QB. Rodgers alone can push us to later in the draft and he eats up a lot of cap space. Not that he's an issue to have on the team of course.

 

[OldSchool101]

I like being an underdog. Being humble is more important than being #1
That said, I 100% agree that our Offense is #1 and I think the evidence of last years play and returning roster make that argument firm.
Our Defense is another beast, It has the fundamental stock components of contending as winning machine but it has the uncertainty of contemporary replacement parts that are not yet tested and in tune. We have the possibility of a Championship D as much as a middle of the road outcome. IMO, the result rests on the shoulders of the positional coaches and their level of success of being congruent. The beauty is we get multiple runs on the track to test the road to victory.
Although we took an extremely tough loss in Seattle, I'm really liking the confidence we gained from that experience. If mini ol' me can get wrap my head around our potential and upside.. I can't imagine how the returning guys that tasted how close they were to competing for a World Championship must feel like. I know AR said he hasn't watched the film in full... As HC, I would start the year by playing the Seattle game (less the halftime BS and commercials) with everyone in the room.. and then look around the room in silence.. and finish by saying "We have work to do, someone has our trophy" and walk out.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

"We have work to do, someone has our trophy" and walk out.

I thought the Patriots had our Trophy?

 

[wist43]

It's also another thing for a poster to consistently bring him up and complain about him even when the topics are not even about Capers.

Coaching matters; gameday playcalling matters... on defense, that's Capers.

He was so bad '11-13 that MM finally had to get involved and force him to change.

As I said, Capers is entirely capable of calling a great game, and he knows x's and o's as well as anyone in the league - what can't be explained is his propensity to shoot himself, and the team, in the foot in critical moments.

How can you evaluate the players in the front 7, if he is going to run subpackages 80% of the time?? So yes, including Capers in rating the players is perfectly valid.