Fire Joe Barry -- Updated -- he's gone

Status
Not open for further replies.

Sunshinepacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
5,766
Reaction score
896
My theory is that this franchise places a lot of importance on veteran experience. Hence why King is playing over, theoretically his replacement in Stokes. At this point, I'd rather Stokes trial by fire than continue to watch King get destroyed or make stupid error after stupid error. We know what King can bring, it can't be any worse with Stokes who may make a mistake, but has the speed like Shields did, to make up for it or to make a play. Put King in the slot and have him cover TE's or run block. He's got no upside out on the perimeter anymore.

I think we're making these assessments after watching less than 60 snaps while the coaches are making these choices after seeing VASTLY more than we do.

Stokes is a physical marvel but he had a LOT to work on before being a decent NFL starter. Breaking his illegal contact habit is going to take time. Pretty much any coach will take a substandard starter over a guy that gives up first downs by penalty all the time.

Look, I'm obviously not a King fan but even I didn't expect King to be THAT bad this game. If fans wanted King to be gone then they need to look squarely at the guy that didn't feel the need to replace his eventual successor with a draft pick in 2019 or 2020 or sign a free agent.

Edit: I also agree that the front office places a ton of value on history with the team but I don't think coaches give two sh*ts about history if he's being significantly outplayed during practice.
 

milani

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 11, 2012
Messages
4,195
Reaction score
1,507
My theory is that this franchise places a lot of importance on veteran experience. Hence why King is playing over, theoretically his replacement in Stokes. At this point, I'd rather Stokes trial by fire than continue to watch King get destroyed or make stupid error after stupid error. We know what King can bring, it can't be any worse with Stokes who may make a mistake, but has the speed like Shields did, to make up for it or to make a play. Put King in the slot and have him cover TE's or run block. He's got no upside out on the perimeter anymore.
Good idea. In the Thompson years it seemed that he always pushed for younger players even when the veteran appeared to be better.
 

Snoops

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 14, 2014
Messages
1,584
Reaction score
267
The Packers have a lot of talented players on defense. Unfortunately they lack talent on the defensive line and the Saints took full advantage of it.
Yes only player that’s halfway decent is Clark. Lowry and Lancaster BLOW I have been saying it the last three years too
 

milani

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 11, 2012
Messages
4,195
Reaction score
1,507
Yes only player that’s halfway decent is Clark. Lowry and Lancaster BLOW I have been saying it the last three years too
Clark has to carry such a load that he is susceptible to injury. Is there anyone capable if spelling him.
 

Snoops

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 14, 2014
Messages
1,584
Reaction score
267
Clark has to carry such a load that he is susceptible to injury. Is there anyone capable if spelling him.
Tbh bro every single player on defense besides Clark and Alexander can go… lol
 

Pugger

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 26, 2008
Messages
2,616
Reaction score
756
Location
N. Fort Myers, FL
No wonder Leonard stayed with Wisconsin and turned down the job! He probably took one look at all the crappy defensive players including King and said no thanks!
I doubt Leonard turned down the job because of a lack of talent on D. Wisconsin doesn't have a bunch of All-Americans on that squad either. He probably enjoys molding young players instead of coping with professional NFL players.
 

GreenNGold_81

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 15, 2015
Messages
1,736
Reaction score
279
I doubt Leonard turned down the job because of a lack of talent on D. Wisconsin doesn't have a bunch of All-Americans on that squad either. He probably enjoys molding young players instead of coping with professional NFL players.

I think it was pretty well established that Leonhard didn't want it because he loves his "dream" job. I think it was pretty close between Evero and Barry after Leonhard didn't accept the offer.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Whether or not you think the inside linebackers are good; they are going to have to back up the D line. And yesterday, most of the time, they were not put in a position to do so. imo

The Packers lack talent at inside linebacker as well.

I agree about our D line. The back 7 is pretty much average. How many Pro Bowlers are on it? One?

The Packers have talented players on defense. Clark, Z. Smith, P. Smith, Gary, Alexander, Amos, Savage. While that might not be good enough to feature an elite defense it should be to not get dominated like on Sunday though.

Tbh bro every single player on defense besides Clark and Alexander can go… lol

Once again, the Packers have a lot more talented players on defense than most of you give credit for.
 
OP
OP
PackerfaninCarolina

PackerfaninCarolina

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 30, 2013
Messages
4,162
Reaction score
316
This only makes sense of you think the coaches are intentionally playing worse players. The more likely scenario is that the guys they have aren't good enough to beat out the guys playing, which would be on Gute.

They are doing exactly that. Bench King, put in SJC, bench Lancaster, put in Slaton, problem solved. The coaches ain't got the balls to do that.
 

Sunshinepacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
5,766
Reaction score
896
They are doing exactly that. Bench King, put in SJC, bench Lancaster, put in Slaton, problem solved. The coaches ain't got the balls to do that.

Wow. Apparently you've seen more of those players than the coaches have. Can you share your secret of spying on practices?
 

Sunshinepacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
5,766
Reaction score
896
The Packers have talented players on defense. Clark, Z. Smith, P. Smith, Gary, Alexander, Amos, Savage. While that might not be good enough to feature an elite defense it should be to not get dominated like on Sunday though.
The Packers are awful at DE and ILB. Kenny Clark can only do so much and once you have to start modifying the defense to account for an awful dline it starts to cascade. Also, only one corner on the team is any good on a consistent basis.

The Packers have talented players but their best pass rusher is only truly elite at rushing the passer when he does it from the inside (talking about Z). I agree that having an elite corner, OLB, and safety plus another very good safety, DT, and OLB should be enough to field a decent defense but for whatever reason the parts don't seem to mesh...and they're being coaches by one of the worst DCs in recent memory.
 
OP
OP
PackerfaninCarolina

PackerfaninCarolina

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 30, 2013
Messages
4,162
Reaction score
316
Wow. Apparently you've seen more of those players than the coaches have. Can you share your secret of spying on practices?

Matt LaFleur has made a bad habit of benching rookies because he doesn't believe in their talents. I'm willing to bet had Rodgers been gone and he had to choose between Love and Bortles to start the season, he'd have chosen Bortles because that is par for his course.
 

Don Barclay

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 20, 2016
Messages
155
Reaction score
138
Matt LaFleur has made a bad habit of benching rookies because he doesn't believe in their talents. I'm willing to bet had Rodgers been gone and he had to choose between Love and Bortles to start the season, he'd have chosen Bortles because that is par for his course.
Same LaFleur who is starting two f-ing rookies on the O line right now? Man, you need to take a breath, it feels like you are posting just to see your own words, rather than trying to make any sense.
 
OP
OP
PackerfaninCarolina

PackerfaninCarolina

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 30, 2013
Messages
4,162
Reaction score
316
Same LaFleur who is starting two f-ing rookies on the O line right now? Man, you need to take a breath, it feels like you are posting just to see your own words, rather than trying to make any sense.

He's kind of forced to do that in Bakh's absence. But his refusal to put players like Gary in his rookie year, Dillon last year and this year, and currently Amari Rodgers and Stokes on the field on every down is evidence he's a chickensh't
 
Last edited:

Don Barclay

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 20, 2016
Messages
155
Reaction score
138
He's kind of forced to do that in Bank's absence. But his refusal to put players like Gary in his rookie year, Dillon last year and this year, and currently Amari Rodgers and Stokes on the field on every down is evidence he's a chickensh't

He's not forced to start them -- he has veteran players in Braden and Runyan. They're just not that good, so he's got rookies starting. Gary and Dillon rotated in while serving behind truly excellent vets (the Smiths, Jones). As Preston's play declined last year and Gary came on, he received more snaps. This is completely normal. Amari Rodgers showed very little in this preseason and is also stuck behind strong vets. These are really different situations from Stokes behind King. I agree that I want to see Stokes, and King drives me up a frickin wall. But it's theatrics to say that LaFleur has a "bad habit of benching rookies", given what he is literally doing right now. And theatrics are fine on a message board -- just feels like there's a saturation point right now.
 
OP
OP
PackerfaninCarolina

PackerfaninCarolina

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 30, 2013
Messages
4,162
Reaction score
316
He's not forced to start them -- he has veteran players in Braden and Runyan. They're just not that good, so he's got rookies starting. Gary and Dillon rotated in while serving behind truly excellent vets (the Smiths, Jones). As Preston's play declined last year and Gary came on, he received more snaps. This is completely normal. Amari Rodgers showed very little in this preseason and is also stuck behind strong vets. These are really different situations from Stokes behind King. I agree that I want to see Stokes, and King drives me up a frickin wall. But it's theatrics to say that LaFleur has a "bad habit of benching rookies", given what he is literally doing right now. And theatrics are fine on a message board -- just feels like there's a saturation point right now.

Either way, he still brought in this current inept clown of a DC we have going right now, and I'm not gonna hear any more of that garbage that Barry was the only option. Ridiculous and hogwash and he needs to be held accountable for it. Firing Barry will instantly upgrade this defense.
 

Don Barclay

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 20, 2016
Messages
155
Reaction score
138
Cool -- I'm more of the mindset that I'll wait and see on Barry past week 1; but I wasn't impressed by the hire, I wasn't impressed with this past game, and this seems like a fair spot to light the bonfire if that's what yer feeling.
 
OP
OP
PackerfaninCarolina

PackerfaninCarolina

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 30, 2013
Messages
4,162
Reaction score
316
Fire Barry if his defense surrenders more than 17 points this next game.

And tell the next DC we demand a 2000 Baltimore Ravens level defense here or his *** is going to get kicked outta here too.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
14,326
Reaction score
5,707
Cool -- I'm more of the mindset that I'll wait and see on Barry past week 1; but I wasn't impressed by the hire, I wasn't impressed with this past game, and this seems like a fair spot to light the bonfire if that's what yer feeling.
Listen. It was a 31 point O performance had the Refs not called Z on a poor call. The O literally kept out Defense out there for near 35/60 minutes in sweltering heat.
Had the clock simply been even though think NO scores 24-28 points. It was bad on our D but the field position they dealt with was atrocious. It was game 1 of 17 games, it’s still premature until they’ve had 2-3 games minimum under their belts to lay an indictment down. People are frustrated I get that but let’s not get ahead of ourselves.
 

Don Barclay

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 20, 2016
Messages
155
Reaction score
138
Listen. It was a 31 point O performance had the Refs not called Z on a poor call. The O literally kept out Defense out there for near 35/60 minutes in sweltering heat.
Had the clock simply been even though think NO scores 24-28 points. It was bad on our D but the field position they dealt with was atrocious. It was game 1 of 17 games, it’s still premature until they’ve had 2-3 games minimum under their belts to lay an indictment down. People are frustrated I get that but let’s not get ahead of ourselves.

Agree. I'm not lighting this bonfire yet. However, I will hang out near it in case someone has marshmallows.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
14,326
Reaction score
5,707
I’ll be happy with a 1 score Win in regulation. Every week we buy time, we also get both the O and D gradually back in rhythm. It should take the Offense 2-3 weeks to start firing on all cylinders. Longer for the Defense, but I could see Z or Gary or Preston stepping up to redeem themselves. You don’t stop all those guys every game idc who is DC
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Latest posts

Top