Do the Packers need to improve?

[PackerDNA]

"

The Packers could trade the entire 2015 draft for a motel plus a gas station to be named later and should still win this division against teams going sideways or backwards.

I wonder what the tone of these conversations would be if the Packers were in the NFC West, playing Seattle, a Palmer-led Arizona team, and the tough Rams defense twice per year. Not to mention the currently floundering 49ers with a QB this defense can't seen to contain while others have less of a problem in that regard.

Well, those are the kinds of teams you're likely to face in the playoffs, perhaps on the road. Something more than "the process" is needed.

Yep.

 

[Joe Nor Cal Packer]

In today's NFL, having a solid O is table stakes. Yes, a good O, especially a great O as the Packers have, will win conferences. But D and STs win championships. I'm more concerned about our STs than D. That said, we Packer fans have little to complain about. Well, except for the last 5 minutes of the NFCC game in Seattle. But even that is history. Onward Pack!!!

 

[NelsonsLongCatch]

No matter what, the Packers should win the division again-and-again. With that being said, the Packers have to improve to finally beat Seattle. The middle of the defense, i.e. nose tackle and inside linebacker, need to be better this year. The status quo needs to change or it'll be the same result.

 

[wist43]

We need ILB help desperately, and we need help at CB...

Now if we could just get rid of Dom Capers we'd be on our way

 

[TJV]

Seriously...a goal unstated is a goal unmet. I thought a reminder might be in order. It's not about winning the division. It's not about adhering to "the process", "contending", "making a run" or accumulating fantasy point.

The Packers could trade the entire 2015 draft for a motel plus a gas station to be named later and should still win this division against teams going sideways or backwards.

I wonder what the tone of these conversations would be if the Packers were in the NFC West, playing Seattle, a Palmer-led Arizona team, and the tough Rams defense twice per year. Not to mention the currently floundering 49ers with a QB this defense can't seen to contain while others have less of a problem in that regard.

Well, those are the kinds of teams you're likely to face in the playoffs, perhaps on the road. Something more than "the process" is needed.

Not sure why you quoted my post, unless it was to address the obvious joke at the beginning of it: I didn't mention winning the division, I mentioned them failing to win a title. And the fact is as bad as the collapse at the end of the NFC title game was, the Packers outplayed Seattle for all but the last 4 minutes or so of regulation and the OT. Of course I'm taking no solace in that; I bring it up to make the point I made in my post: The more pertinent question IMO than the ones you asked is how much improvement is needed. And IMO the answer is not all that much. But before they/we can talk about improvement, the Packers have to address ILB and depth on D, particularly at CB to get back to "even" with last year's D after the bye.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

In today's NFL, having a solid O is table stakes. Yes, a good O, especially a great O as the Packers have, will win conferences. But D and STs win championships. I'm more concerned about our STs than D. That said, we Packer fans have little to complain about. Well, except for the last 5 minutes of the NFCC game in Seattle. But even that is history. Onward Pack!!!

Within the last 10 seasons three teams have won the Super Bowl with their defense being rankwd outside the top 20 in points allowed. By addressing the ILB position the Packers defense should be good enough to win it all.

 

[Ogsponge]

Above all else they need to improve their killer instinct and mental toughness. They are too soft and it is getting really old. The offense is soft the defense is soft and the special teams is jello.

 

[tynimiller]

But that offense couldn`t get it done when it mattered. Sorry mate, but we DO need to improve.

I would argue being one of a very few teams returning the 11 starters, primary backups in every position (except QB) will naturally cause improvement. Linsley will have another year under his belt, as will Adams/Rodgers (TE)....also not to mention we still have the draft and the likes of Janis/Abb coming up possibly this year healthy and with a year under their belts in the system.

Leading the league in anything is fine, but unless it's winning the last game, it doesn't count.

You gotta build a team that can contend, from there no guarantees....we are one of the top teams yet again, and a lock for the playoffs barring health issues. I'd say that has to count for something.

All well and good, but the point is every time this offense went against an upper tier defense, save for the second Detroit game, they s**t the bed. Rodgers was healthy for the first three of those five games.

I agree to an extent but our Defense lost more games than our offense did this past year.

Obviously all thoughts are just that my thoughts.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Within the last 10 seasons three teams have won the Super Bowl with their defense being rankwd outside the top 20 in points allowed. By addressing the ILB position the Packers defense should be good enough to win it all.

If Raji can shock the world and become a very good NT or if Guion makes a tremendous jump to become a very good NT (not knocking Guion, going from adequate to very good is a tremendous jump) or if someone else becomes a very good NT, I don't think ILB will be nearly the weakness many expect. ILB has stood out so much because the NTs have been a weakness as well. If the Packers can get help at NT or ILB then I think the middle of the defense will improve a surprising amount. I actually think that NT might be more of a need since the Packer can currently just slot Matthews inside on run downs if they don't get a guy in the draft (not optimal but possible).

 

[Deleted member 6794]

If Raji can shock the world and become a very good NT or if Guion makes a tremendous jump to become a very good NT (not knocking Guion, going from adequate to very good is a tremendous jump) or if someone else becomes a very good NT, I don't think ILB will be nearly the weakness many expect. ILB has stood out so much because the NTs have been a weakness as well. If the Packers can get help at NT or ILB then I think the middle of the defense will improve a surprising amount. I actually think that NT might be more of a need since the Packer can currently just slot Matthews inside on run downs if they don't get a guy in the draft (not optimal but possible).

I agree that improved play at NT would make the ILBs look better as well, nevertheless the inside linebacker position has to be drastically upgraded though.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Not sure why you quoted my post, unless it was to address the obvious joke at the beginning of it.

Correct. As for the rest, not every post is a disagreement. Sometimes it's just an elaboration or a conversation.

 

[wist43]

If Raji can shock the world and become a very good NT or if Guion makes a tremendous jump to become a very good NT (not knocking Guion, going from adequate to very good is a tremendous jump) or if someone else becomes a very good NT, I don't think ILB will be nearly the weakness many expect. ILB has stood out so much because the NTs have been a weakness as well. If the Packers can get help at NT or ILB then I think the middle of the defense will improve a surprising amount. I actually think that NT might be more of a need since the Packer can currently just slot Matthews inside on run downs if they don't get a guy in the draft (not optimal but possible).

It isn't the NT position that's been the problem, it's how the front seven (6 most of the time prior to last year) have been used.

Capers has very rarely played a straight up 3-4 with a traditional NT head up on the center. For most of '11, '12, and '13 he played his idiotic "Jumbo 2-4" most of the time and had Raji and Pickett lined up to take on all 5 Offensive linemen - and predictably we got run over.

Last year, after a lot of pressure from MM and TT I'm sure, he switched over to a hybrid that at least employed 3 DL most of the time; and, he finally admitted that Hawk and Jones are both junk (again, I'm sure, with a lot of pressure from upstairs) and drew up some alignments with Clay playing inside.

I like Barrington well enough, but haven't much hope for Bradford.

Those are the only 2 ILB's we have on the roster right now. Maybe Palmer or Mulumba can play inside, not sure on either one though. I like Mulumba, but not sure he'd fit inside.

Any way you slice it, ILB has been a mess for years - hopefully this is the year that TT finally addresses it.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

It isn't the NT position that's been the problem, it's how the front seven (6 most of the time prior to last year) have been used.

Capers has very rarely played a straight up 3-4 with a traditional NT head up on the center. For most of '11, '12, and '13 he played his idiotic "Jumbo 2-4" most of the time and had Raji and Pickett lined up to take on all 5 Offensive linemen - and predictably we got run over.

Last year, after a lot of pressure from MM and TT I'm sure, he switched over to a hybrid that at least employed 3 DL most of the time; and, he finally admitted that Hawk and Jones are both junk (again, I'm sure, with a lot of pressure from upstairs) and drew up some alignments with Clay playing inside.

I like Barrington well enough, but haven't much hope for Bradford.

Those are the only 2 ILB's we have on the roster right now. Maybe Palmer or Mulumba can play inside, not sure on either one though. I like Mulumba, but not sure he'd fit inside.

Any way you slice it, ILB has been a mess for years - hopefully this is the year that TT finally addresses it.

Here's my question, isn't it a strong possibility that the lack of a good NT on the roster is why Capers hasn't used a "true" NT role? I mean, he really would be a terrible defensive coordinator if he insisted on a true NT when he didn't have great players to play the position. Coordinators are supposed to adjust their scheme to personnel. Packers have never had a good-to-great NT, so it's not surprising that he hasn't emphasized that role.

You say we only have two ILBs, which is true. However,I look at it differently. The Packers have a great player in Matthews that can play ILB but they don't have that at NT. If the Packers want to get their best linebackers on the field then Matthews is moving inside on run downs (don't think many wasn't to see Peppers or Perry inside).

 

[adambr2]

Understand by no means am I suggesting we retool our entire defense and throw out the 4-3, but is it just me or isn't our current roster a much better fit for a lot of 4-3 alignments? Lots of big bodies, no ILB depth, but good OLBs. Peppers I would imagine would play with his hand back in the dirt on the other side of Daniels.

Just more thinking out loud than anything, I would just imagine if I looked at our personnel with a new coordinator and no idea how our defensive formations would look, I would think we were much better suited for the 4-3. I know they won't be doing anything exclusively, just curious as if they're going to mix in some different such looks.

 

[wist43]

Here's my question, isn't it a strong possibility that the lack of a good NT on the roster is why Capers hasn't used a "true" NT role? I mean, he really would be a terrible defensive coordinator if he insisted on a true NT when he didn't have great players to play the position. Coordinators are supposed to adjust their scheme to personnel. Packers have never had a good-to-great NT, so it's not surprising that he hasn't emphasized that role.

You say we only have two ILBs, which is true. However,I look at it differently. The Packers have a great player in Matthews that can play ILB but they don't have that at NT. If the Packers want to get their best linebackers on the field then Matthews is moving inside on run downs (don't think many wasn't to see Peppers or Perry inside).

Pickett was a true NT, and a good one... Capers has stated many times that he fears the pass more than the run, so he's willing to sacrifice being stout up front in favor of running a nickel as his base - more often than not. He ran the "Jumbo 2-4" on run downs (the dumbest of all alignments), and substituted Pickett for a pass rushing DL on passing downs - still running a 2-4.

As a result of being determined to run a nickel as his base, he essentially misused his almost everyone in the front (6), and the results were pathetic - and once we got in the playoffs, the results went from pathetic to embarrassing.

Thankfully that ended last year when MM forced Capers to play the run. TT dumped most of the fat guys, and went with smaller/quicker defensive linemen - but the key to improvement was that Capers was forced to play at least 3 defensive linemen most of the year.

We still got run over for much of the year, until players got settled into roles - and yes, moving Clay inside on occassion helped tremendously. Moving Clay around as a rover is something I've been calling for for a while - if for no other reason than we were so lacking in talent on the second level.

The way they're lining up now, we don't need a true NT b/c we're going to be running a hybrid with 3 DL and an Elephant. Given our current personnel, that is the best alignment to run.

The bottom line is - Capers did a horrific job of utilizing the talent he had available to him for all those years '11-'13. He should have been fired, but of course Ted and MM are slow to anger and willing to tolerate poor performance for longer than most can stomach.

 

[rodell330]

YES.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Pickett was a true NT, and a good one... Capers has stated many times that he fears the pass more than the run, so he's willing to sacrifice being stout up front in favor of running a nickel as his base - more often than not. He ran the "Jumbo 2-4" on run downs (the dumbest of all alignments), and substituted Pickett for a pass rushing DL on passing downs - still running a 2-4.

As a result of being determined to run a nickel as his base, he essentially misused his almost everyone in the front (6), and the results were pathetic - and once we got in the playoffs, the results went from pathetic to embarrassing.

Thankfully that ended last year when MM forced Capers to play the run. TT dumped most of the fat guys, and went with smaller/quicker defensive linemen - but the key to improvement was that Capers was forced to play at least 3 defensive linemen most of the year.

We still got run over for much of the year, until players got settled into roles - and yes, moving Clay inside on occassion helped tremendously. Moving Clay around as a rover is something I've been calling for for a while - if for no other reason than we were so lacking in talent on the second level.

The way they're lining up now, we don't need a true NT b/c we're going to be running a hybrid with 3 DL and an Elephant. Given our current personnel, that is the best alignment to run.

The bottom line is - Capers did a horrific job of utilizing the talent he had available to him for all those years '11-'13. He should have been fired, but of course Ted and MM are slow to anger and willing to tolerate poor performance for longer than most can stomach.

Pickett was decent at NT but not great and the other guys on the dline when Pickett was here were Raji, CJ Wilson, Jarius Wynn and Jerel Worthy...and you're upset that Capers didn't play THREE of that illustrious lineup at the same time? In what world does putting CJ Wilson in for more defensive plays help the defense?

You credit McCarthy for his inputs into last year's defense, inputs that were so terrific that the team completely abandoned them after four games because offenses were destroying them!

You're upset that Capers used a lot of nickel but pretty much every team in the NFL uses a lot of nickel. I couldn't quickly find a more updated stat but in 2011, NFL offenses lined up with three or more wide receivers 49% of the time. Additionally, I've already pointed out the dline stalwarts that the Packers had in 2011 and 2012. Out of Wynn, Worthy and Wilson, which of those guys would have had a more positive defensive impact than Desmond Bishop, AJ Hawk or Brad Jones (when he was good in 2011)? Because you can't just say Capers played too much nickel. You need to pick which corner/safety/ILB is going to come off the field for Wynn, Worthy or Wilson (I've excluded Neal because he was constantly injured when playing dline).

Maybe my thoughts are completely off base. Maybe more playing time for Howard Green would have been the difference in 2011. I doubt it, but the possibility does exist....

 

[Half Empty]

You gotta build a team that can contend, from there no guarantees....we are one of the top teams yet again, and a lock for the playoffs barring health issues. I'd say that has to count for something.

No point in beating on that dead horse much more, but this is precisely the reason that I feel it doesn't count without another Lombardi at the end. To, year after year, be in contention, win lots of games, take the division and therefore have a very realistic hope for winning it all...and then leaving early...is what causes me gnashing of teeth. Two decades, (fill in the blank, but probably) 16 or so legitimate chances, and two championships.

Also why I personally disagree with folks who tell me how lucky we've been lately. In the '70s and '80s, we generally knew they weren't going anywhere, and they fulfilled our expectations. Joy was measured in individual wins, knocking somebody else out of the playoffs, that sort of thing. The last 20 years, meeting expectations didn't come up so much, particularly the year after each of the real wins.

 

[XPack]

Yup. I think our team is at a stage where we Post Season should be a default and not a achievement.

 

[RRyder]

No point in beating on that dead horse much more, but this is precisely the reason that I feel it doesn't count without another Lombardi at the end. To, year after year, be in contention, win lots of games, take the division and therefore have a very realistic hope for winning it all...and then leaving early...is what causes me gnashing of teeth. Two decades, (fill in the blank, but probably) 16 or so legitimate chances, and two championships.

Also why I personally disagree with folks who tell me how lucky we've been lately. In the '70s and '80s, we generally knew they weren't going anywhere, and they fulfilled our expectations. Joy was measured in individual wins, knocking somebody else out of the playoffs, that sort of thing. The last 20 years, meeting expectations didn't come up so much, particularly the year after each of the real wins.

16 legitimate chances and only 2 championships as you put really just illustrates how difficult it truly is to win a championship. Lets count the number of teams with more then 2 superbowl wins in the last 20 years. This is just off the top of my head but ill say the Patriots and....... the Patriots???. Few teams come to mind with 2. Ravens, Steelers, Giants and Broncos matchs GBs championship total in the last 20 years and thats all. Feel free to add the 94 season to add the Cowboys to the list to make u feel better though but the point is winning a SB is a rarity. Not a common occurrence no matter how much you wish it.

And good god your last paragraph might just be the very defination of a spoiled Packers fan." I'd rather win 5 games and be thrilled about each win then win 12 and be disapointed we didnt win it all." Just become a Browns fan n call it a day then

 

[PackerDNA]

Yup. I think our team is at a stage where we Post Season should be a default and not a achievement.

This is the point it's getting to for me, also. Sure, it's great to win 10+ games a year, win your division and go to the playoffs. But go long enough without closing the deal with a title, and contender becomes another word for also ran.
The Packers won't win the title every year - obviously- but as a fan I don't believe it's too much to expect better than 2 titles in 47 seasons. Especially when the last 23 of those seasons have come with hall of fame bound QB's at the helm.

 

[PikeBadger]

This is the point it's getting to for me, also. Sure, it's great to win 10+ games a year, win your division and go to the playoffs. But go long enough without closing the deal with a title, and contender becomes another word for also ran.
The Packers won't win the title every year - obviously- but as a fan I don't believe it's too much to expect better than 2 titles in 47 seasons. Especially when the last 23 of those seasons have come with hall of fame bound QB's at the helm.

Or how about 7 titles in 54 years? Your convenient cutoff at the 68 season is just flat out intellectual dishonesty. Very, very weak.

 

[wist43]

Pickett was decent at NT but not great and the other guys on the dline when Pickett was here were Raji, CJ Wilson, Jarius Wynn and Jerel Worthy...and you're upset that Capers didn't play THREE of that illustrious lineup at the same time? In what world does putting CJ Wilson in for more defensive plays help the defense?

You credit McCarthy for his inputs into last year's defense, inputs that were so terrific that the team completely abandoned them after four games because offenses were destroying them!

You're upset that Capers used a lot of nickel but pretty much every team in the NFL uses a lot of nickel. I couldn't quickly find a more updated stat but in 2011, NFL offenses lined up with three or more wide receivers 49% of the time. Additionally, I've already pointed out the dline stalwarts that the Packers had in 2011 and 2012. Out of Wynn, Worthy and Wilson, which of those guys would have had a more positive defensive impact than Desmond Bishop, AJ Hawk or Brad Jones (when he was good in 2011)? Because you can't just say Capers played too much nickel. You need to pick which corner/safety/ILB is going to come off the field for Wynn, Worthy or Wilson (I've excluded Neal because he was constantly injured when playing dline).

Maybe my thoughts are completely off base. Maybe more playing time for Howard Green would have been the difference in 2011. I doubt it, but the possibility does exist....

2011 was a mess after they let Cullen Jenkins walk. Capers started playing a lot of 2-4 in our SB season, but it was a workable alignment b/c of the talent we had, i.e. Jenkins, Woodson, and Bishop were all better players than the chaff that followed them.

Of course Jenkins walked, Woodson slowed, and Bishop got hurt. I, and many others saw the writing on the wall - yet TT did nothing to help the defense in the draft following the SB. He focused on offense in the early rounds, and on defense only added Devon House (4th round), DJ Smith (6th round), and Lawrence Guy (7th round).

Of those guys, only House could play, and for that draft only Cobb is still with the team - terrible draft.

So I don't entirely blame Capers for the mess that showed up on the field in '11 - that was certainly a group effort. After that disasterous defensive showing in '11, TT began to work to rebuild the unit, and it was at that point that Capers is almost fully to blame. He misused everyone, and stubbornly stuck to his flawed approach.

In '12 and 13', Capers had more DL talent available to him, but still stuck with that idiotic "Jumbo 2-4"... it cost us dearly. Up until last year when MM said he would get involved with fixing the mess that was our defense, and the result was a hybrid 3-4 with Matthews playing Elephant. The unit improved immediately - of course the addition of Peppers and HaHa helped greatly.

 

[TJV]

So I don't entirely blame Capers for the mess ...

It’s amazing how this poster has changed his tune. In his first post here this poster called Capers names and said he didn’t like the Peppers signing. It’s taken him quite a while to acknowledge the 2-4 worked in 2009 and 2010. Because of his hatred for Capers he had to be ‘dragged, kicking and screaming’ to acknowledge Thompson bears some responsibility for the personnel Capers has to choose from. Just about one year ago, everything was Capers’ fault according to him.

But his obsession with criticizing the 2-4 continues - but he has trouble explaining it because he doesn’t understand the alignment, just ask mradtke66 among others.
https://www.packerforum.com/threads/packers-ink-peppers.51020/page-3#post-547574

 

[tynimiller]

No point in beating on that dead horse much more, but this is precisely the reason that I feel it doesn't count without another Lombardi at the end. To, year after year, be in contention, win lots of games, take the division and therefore have a very realistic hope for winning it all...and then leaving early...is what causes me gnashing of teeth. Two decades, (fill in the blank, but probably) 16 or so legitimate chances, and two championships.

Also why I personally disagree with folks who tell me how lucky we've been lately. In the '70s and '80s, we generally knew they weren't going anywhere, and they fulfilled our expectations. Joy was measured in individual wins, knocking somebody else out of the playoffs, that sort of thing. The last 20 years, meeting expectations didn't come up so much, particularly the year after each of the real wins.

Sorry but I cannot ignore the great level of play this team has achieved over the past decade or so. To know going into the season the Super Bowl is a true possibility and not just a fan hoping and praying is truly a blessing I think many of the likes of the fan base are beginning to take for granted far too often. To be completely honest it would serve our fan base right to have a stretch of 4 or 5 years of truly being out of contention to maybe realize just how great times are and have been for some time in GB.

I forgot though, it's easy to win SBs...I mean it's not like over the last 20 years we have only had 2 teams repeat and have had 13 different teams take the SB. Seems easy peasy to achieve.....