Fire Capers

[Pokerbrat2000]

The Packers defense has only finished in the top 15 of Football Outsiders' DVOA rankings twice over the last six seasons. While I mostly blame that on a lack of talent the unit has mostly performed below average since winning the Super Bowl.

Hard to win playoff games, yet alone make it to a Super Bowl with these kinds of defenses. Packers defenses tend to hold their own against average or below average offenses, but when facing playoff caliber offenses or a suddenly accurate QB, the wheels come off. Capers has a reputation for having a brilliant defensive mind, but I am starting to feel like the game has passed him by. Sure he needs more talent from TT, but isn't there a possibility that he just doesn't have a good handle on coaching the new generation of players? The 22-30 year old today is a much different person than 20 years ago. IMO, its time to bring in a young up and coming defensive coach, who can bring with him some fresh ideas and energy.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

The Packers defense has only finished in the top 15 of Football Outsiders' DVOA rankings twice over the last six seasons. While I mostly blame that on a lack of talent the unit has mostly performed below average since winning the Super Bowl.

Was it just a coincidence that you chose a time frame which conveniently left out the years the defense was ranked second in the NFL (2009 and 2010)? I mean, I get that you say "since winning the Super Bowl" but you can't just ignore those years because Capers was coach then as well. Unless you're contending that Capers has forgotten how to coach or the game has passed him by since 2010. I could buy the argument that in 2009 and 2010 the team had more veterans because Thompson was more active in free agency and his team building philosophy had not yet deprived the defense of veteran players; but if that's the contention, then that's on the GM, not the coach. The GM hires a head coach he likes and then his job is to supply that coach with players. If the GM hires a DC that works best with some vets, then the GM's job is to get vets, not handicap the defensive coordinator.

 

[Half Empty]

Anything to do with the conventional wisdom that Capers' history is really good early in his stay, falls off after that?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Hard to win playoff games, yet alone make it to a Super Bowl with these kinds of defenses. Packers defenses tend to hold their own against average or below average offenses, but when facing playoff caliber offenses or a suddenly accurate QB, the wheels come off. Capers has a reputation for having a brilliant defensive mind, but I am starting to feel like the game has passed him by. Sure he needs more talent from TT, but isn't there a possibility that he just doesn't have a good handle on coaching the new generation of players? The 22-30 year old today is a much different person than 20 years ago. IMO, its time to bring in a young up and coming defensive coach, who can bring with him some fresh ideas and energy.

As I´ve said repeatedly I wouldn´t mind replacing Capers with a younger defensive coordinator but because of the lack of talent on that side of the ball I´m not convinced it would yield any better results.

Was it just a coincidence that you chose a time frame which conveniently left out the years the defense was ranked second in the NFL (2009 and 2010)? I mean, I get that you say "since winning the Super Bowl" but you can't just ignore those years because Capers was coach then as well. Unless you're contending that Capers has forgotten how to coach or the game has passed him by since 2010. I could buy the argument that in 2009 and 2010 the team had more veterans because Thompson was more active in free agency and his team building philosophy had not yet deprived the defense of veteran players; but if that's the contention, then that's on the GM, not the coach. The GM hires a head coach he likes and then his job is to supply that coach with players. If the GM hires a DC that works best with some vets, then the GM's job is to get vets, not handicap the defensive coordinator.

It wasn´t a coincidence that I chose the time frame since winning the Super Bowl. There´s absolutely no doubt Capers did an excellent job during his first two seasons with the Packers. The front office better figures out pretty fast what caused his defense to regress over the last six seasons though.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

As I´ve said repeatedly I wouldn´t mind replacing Capers with a younger defensive coordinator but because of the lack of talent on that side of the ball I´m not convinced it would yield any better results.

Right, but how long do you wait for Capers to prove himself better than other options? How long do you give TT to give Capers better talent? I'm not trying to paint a picture of "The Packers are The Cleveland Browns" on defense, but if people want Super Bowls and we keep seeing the same things we have been seeing on defense, I'm not so sure a Super Bowl is a realistic goal. Firing Capers and bringing in a new DC would be a leap of faith, but at this point its probably going to happen sooner or later, either due to his age or lack of production, I have decided I am ready for a change now.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Right, but how long do you wait for Capers to prove himself better than other options? How long do you give TT to give Capers better talent? I'm not trying to paint a picture of "The Packers are The Cleveland Browns" on defense, but if people want Super Bowls and we keep seeing the same things we have been seeing on defense, I'm not so sure a Super Bowl is a realistic goal. Firing Capers and bringing in a new DC would be a leap of faith, but at this point its probably going to happen sooner or later, either due to his age or lack of production, I have decided I am ready for a change now.

I would have absolutely been fine with the Packers releasing Thompson and Capers this offseason. If TT once again doesn´t use free agency to upgrade the roster and the team ends up short of winning the Super Bowl next season there´s no way he should be back as the general manager in 2018. On the other hand DC should be fired if the talent level is improved yet the results are the same on that side of the ball. Otherwise he might deserve another chance with a different GM.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I would have absolutely been fine with the Packers releasing Thompson and Capers this offseason. If TT once again doesn´t use free agency to upgrade the roster and the team ends up short of winning the Super Bowl next season there´s no way he should be back as the general manager in 2018. On the other hand DC should be fired if the talent level is improved yet the results are the same on that side of the ball. Otherwise he might deserve another chance with a different GM.

I think that would have happened had the 4-6 start to the season continued on the same course. The interesting part of the 8-0 run, it was greatly aided by an offense that sprung to life and a lot of turnovers (some forced, some not). I didn't see a ton of improvement with the defense.

 

[Adrien]

Ive showed my frustration with him. This game showed how horrible he is. Put your input

So, who would you like to see the Pack hire as defensive coordinator? (I agree with you that Ted Thompson needs to go)

 

[Adrien]

So, who would you like to see the Pack hire as defensive coordinator? (I agree with you that Ted Thompson needs to go)

*My bad I meant Dom Capers

 

[Poppa San]

*My bad I meant Dom Capers

FYI you can edit the post without posting another saying you goofed.

 

[adambr2]

Right, but how long do you wait for Capers to prove himself better than other options? How long do you give TT to give Capers better talent? I'm not trying to paint a picture of "The Packers are The Cleveland Browns" on defense, but if people want Super Bowls and we keep seeing the same things we have been seeing on defense, I'm not so sure a Super Bowl is a realistic goal. Firing Capers and bringing in a new DC would be a leap of faith, but at this point its probably going to happen sooner or later, either due to his age or lack of production, I have decided I am ready for a change now.

I've been on the fence a bit as to the blame game between Thompson and Capers. While I would say Ted definitely needs to draft better on D, I tire a bit of hearing the woe tales of Capers just not having any defensive talent to work with.

It was pretty much consensus when he signed that Daniels was one of the top 3-5 3-4 DEs in football. Perry definitely had a breakout year in 2017, we are consistently told that Peppers is a difference maker and Matthews is supposed to be in his prime as one of the top pass rushing 3-4 OLBs in football. Wouldn't most agree that Burnett/Clinton-Dix are one of the better safety combos in the NFL?

Obviously corner was our weakest link, but a year ago, everyone was excited at how promising Randall was. He obviously sucked this year, but who is to blame for that? We can blame TT for the pick all day, but we all liked the pick a year ago. So why did a promising young corner fall off so bad? I think we need to look a little deeper than saying Randall was just bad. We are constantly told by beat writers and the coaching staff how valuable Micah Hyde is, but where were the results?

While 1st round picks don't necessarily equate to most talent, the correlation SHOULD definitely be there if your drafts are even average, and you'd be hard pressed to find a defense with more first round picks on the roster.

Either Capers is pretty sorely lacking in getting the most out of these guys, or the FO is pretty severely overselling the guys we have and we need massive overhauls and/or paycuts with the current roster.

Consider this, last time we had an elite defense, we had a DPOY candidate (Woodson), arguably the best safety in football (Collins), one of the best pass rushers in football (Matthews), an elite 3-4 NT (Raji), and an emerging shutdown corner (Williams). How much more talent can you ask for?

Clearly, talent helps, but it's hard for me to see much value in a defensive coordinator who seems to need an elite player at every single position to be effective.

 

[Adrien]

FYI you can edit the post without posting another saying you goofed.

I didn't know. I just created my account. Thanks!

 

[Sky King]

...Consider this, last time we had an elite defense, we had a DPOY candidate (Woodson), arguably the best safety in football (Collins), one of the best pass rushers in football (Matthews), an elite 3-4 NT (Raji), and an emerging shutdown corner (Williams). How much more talent can you ask for?

Clearly, talent helps, but it's hard for me to see much value in a defensive coordinator who seems to need an elite player at every single position to be effective.

The last statement raises a valid counterpoint: No DC can have an effective defense with zero players on his side of the roster that are truly elite. The closest this team came to having elite personnel on defense this past season might be Daniels, Perry, Peppers, Matthews or Clinton-Dix. Well, maybe not quite elite and therein lies the problem.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

The last statement raises a valid counterpoint: No DC can have an effective defense with zero players on his side of the roster that are truly elite. The closest this team came to having elite personnel on defense this past season might be Daniels, Perry, Peppers, Matthews or Clinton-Dix. Well, maybe not quite elite and therein lies the problem.

I'm not so sure that you have to have "elite" more than you have to have balanced quality and good depth. While having a couple of "elite" players on defense could for sure help, I would prefer a solid 11 players and depth over 2 pro bowlers that are surrounded by sub par teammates.

 

[adambr2]

The last statement raises a valid counterpoint: No DC can have an effective defense with zero players on his side of the roster that are truly elite. The closest this team came to having elite personnel on defense this past season might be Daniels, Perry, Peppers, Matthews or Clinton-Dix. Well, maybe not quite elite and therein lies the problem.

Who is this elite player on the Patriots D? Malcolm Butler? Dont'a Hightower? I don't see an elite, Von Miller, Khalil Mack, Kuehly, or even a Janoris Jenkins, Harrison Smith or Sean Lee type elite defensive player on that unit and they seemed to do just fine with the talent they have.

 

[Dantés]

Who is this elite player on the Patriots D? Malcolm Butler? Dont'a Hightower? I don't see an elite, Von Miller, Khalil Mack, Kuehly, or even a Janoris Jenkins, Harrison Smith or Sean Lee type elite defensive player on that unit and they seemed to do just fine with the talent they have.

It's Devin McCourty. But the point is well taken that the Pats don't have much in the way of elite defensive players. They have a number of guys who are very good (Branch, Brown, Hightower, Butler, and Ryan), some up and comers (Flowers), and a lot of role players. But there's no doubt in my mind that they are far better than the sum of their parts because their coaching staff is the best in the league at knowing how to deploy them and crafting scheme to fit talent.

It would be unrealistic to expect the Packers to find defensive coaching of that caliber. But I absolutely believe they could do a lot better than Capers.

 

[Packer Brother]

There are three scenarios happening here:

Capers is kept on because the F.O knows it's the players & not the scheme. Which begs the usual question: Why hasn't TT upgraded that side of the ball.

Capers has dirt on someone high up.

Packers are scared of change. In other words, terrified someone " unknown" and worse could come along.

I'm thinking it's option 1.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

There are three scenarios happening here:

Capers is kept on because the F.O knows it's the players & not the scheme. Which begs the usual question: Why hasn't TT upgraded that side of the ball.

Capers has dirt on someone high up.

Packers are scared of change. In other words, terrified someone " unknown" and worse could come along.

I'm thinking it's option 1.

With all due respect. I think you forgot option #4: The Packers organization has been pretty successful, not elite.. but profitable and in contention. However, each and every year they go into the offseason thinking they are "this close" and maybe only a few missing "player pieces" away from reaching the ultimate goal. Therefore, they fear risking big change, in the form of the GM, head coach or DC, in the event that it pushes them backwards, instead of forwards over that last hurdle or two. Some might call it settling for second best, possibly the Packers are calling it "business as usual".

I'm not saying I agree with operating under this scenario, but it sure seems like it has become the Packer way as of late.

Edit: I guess this is somewhat similar to your option #3

Edit #2: I think what has a lot of outsiders looking in frustrated the most, is what most of us have alluded to for a long time now. Is the Packer organization fully aware of just what AR adds to the team? Without him, I think many of these changes that we talk about, would have probably been made years ago, out of necessity.

 

[Dantés]

With all due respect. I think you forgot option #4: The Packers organization has been pretty successful, not elite.. but profitable and in contention. However, each and every year they go into the offseason thinking they are "this close" and maybe only a few missing "player pieces" away from reaching the ultimate goal. Therefore, they fear risking big change, in the form of the GM, head coach or DC, in the event that it pushes them backwards, instead of forwards over that last hurdle or two. Some might call it settling for second best, possibly the Packers are calling it "business as usual".

I'm not saying I agree with this scenario, but it sure seems like it has become the Packer way as of late.

I think you're correct.

It isn't crazy that a team that is 4th in wins under this regime and coming off the NFCCG would think that continuity is the way to go. I have my own opinions as to where they need to make changes, but it's pretty easy to understand why they would prefer to stay the course.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I think you're correct.

It isn't crazy that a team that is 4th in wins under this regime and coming off the NFCCG would think that continuity is the way to go. I have my own opinions as to where they need to make changes, but it's pretty easy to understand why they would prefer to stay the course.

Agreed. Some might refer to this as a "good old boys club" who has a motto of "it it ain't broke, don't fix it." While this looks great from where they all sit collecting paychecks, its really hard not to notice the Cadillac (Aaron Rodgers) parked in the garage with half inflated tires.

 

[Packer Brother]

I think you're correct.

It isn't crazy that a team that is 4th in wins under this regime and coming off the NFCCG would think that continuity is the way to go. I have my own opinions as to where they need to make changes, but it's pretty easy to understand why they would prefer to stay the course.

This is a 2 win team minus Rodgers. I'm dead serious. This isn't as " talented" a team pundits make it out to be.

Favre had Freeman, White, Butler, Sharper, Rison, Driver, Jennings, Sharpe, Walker, etc. Rodgers has Nelson. Adams is up & down. Cobb is overpaid. Matthews is average at best now. Peppers is cooked.

 

[Sky King]

It's usually a combination of things. In this case, let's start with the GM and rightfully so. He's been very good at drafting players overall and he's occasionally picked-up free-agents that have been major contributors. He just seems to fall a little bit short.

Capers complex defensive schemes seem best suited to experienced players that also happen to be bright and instinctual. The latter seems to be an absolute necessity. It's reputed to be a thinking man's defense. However, Thompson's D&D philosophy does not favor seasoned vets other than those few deemed by him valuable enough to be retained as core players. This may be a problem.

The two men and their basic, well-known philosophies do not seem to make an ideal fit. While Thompson is notoriously a fiscal conservative, that trait also forces him to be a gambler. Relying upon that fabled second-year jump to have occured for Randall and Rollins this past season is an example of that. And when it didn't happen regardless of the reasons...ouch! Backing them up with first-year UDFAs and a ST specialist coming off a suspension for violating the NFL's drug policy only compounded that gamble. The "house" lost. Slow-footed Hyde came through okay for the team but all things considered it wasn't nearly enough to save this under performing CB group from last season's dismal showing.

So if the overall talent is sub-par on defense, especially at CB, it is a problem that falls squarely on the shoulders of the GM. If any member of the coaching staff is not a good fit to best utilize the D&D level talent Thompson provides for him, then Thompson is also accountable for tolerating that failing situation. After all, he is the top-most official in football operations and the buck stops at his desk. He is ultimately responsible for what gets put on the field or up in the coaches box.

Good or bad Thompson is the one fully responsible.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Obviously corner was our weakest link, but a year ago, everyone was excited at how promising Randall was. He obviously sucked this year, but who is to blame for that? We can blame TT for the pick all day, but we all liked the pick a year ago.

There were several posters around here, me included, that absolutely didn't like the Packers selecting Randall in the first round.

I'm not so sure that you have to have "elite" more than you have to have balanced quality and good depth. While having a couple of "elite" players on defense could for sure help, I would prefer a solid 11 players and depth over 2 pro bowlers that are surrounded by sub par teammates.

I agree that quality depth at every position is important as well having at least one or two elite difference makers on defense woukd drastically improve the Packers unit.

 

[adambr2]

There were several posters around here, me included, that absolutely didn't like the Packers selecting Randall in the first round.

When he was drafted, or a year ago? I was skeptical of the pick when he was drafted, mostly because he seemed to be better suited at safety than corner, but I and I think most others a year ago thought he looked like a pretty solid young ascending corner.

It's easy to go back now and say we didn't like the pick which I know many of us didn't but I'm just saying a year ago I think we were pretty much all in agreement that the arrow was pointing up for Randall and we thought he would turn out okay.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

When he was drafted, or a year ago? I was skeptical of the pick when he was drafted but I and I think most others a year ago thought he looked like a pretty solid young ascending corner.

Randall looked promising early in his rookie season but struggled later that year after teams had some tape on him. Most likely he's best suited to play free safety.