Fire Matt LaFleur

[OldSchool101]

But when you have a 9 point lead after a defensive stop with good field position and you are facing the top D in the NFL in the 3rd quarter you might be thinking more down and distance. Rest your D, move the chains, flip the field, and use some clock. Going for the jugular against the Jets or Raiders might be worth it. But vs. the Broncos the consequences could be disastrous. And they were.

True. There’s a couple very relevant arguments though. I think part of that strategy was using the “Dan Campbell” approach. If you recall we had just lost our starting RT (and several others). It’s very possible we were thinking about that Bears game. Denver is very similar to the Bears in the way they’ve won games. If you let them hang around they more often than not will close the gap and come out on top. One approach is to put Denver in a position they haven’t seen themselves. Down 3 scores.
THEN.. you flip the switch and go the other approach. It was still earlier 3rd Quarter. Conservative works better in Q4. I’d be very mad at Matt if he took the foot off the gas and went conservative. We’ve won games by trusting Jordan Love, not by using a more timid approach mid Q3 if that makes sense? I’m not suggesting that’s your plan, but had we lost the game trying to run clock in Q3,4 I’m pretty sure even worse sentiment would be directed at MLF.

Matt sais this statement quite often. So I’m assuming it’s an integral part of his overall strategy.

“No Risk..No Reward”.

That philosophy thus far has won a historical number of games. Us older guys remember the 1970’s-80’s. My brother used to use the term accurately. Run-Run-Pass-Punt
Run-Run-Pass-Punt.
Please dear God don’t make mistake again! lol

 

[milani]

It's pretty wild how playoff seeding can vary from week to week. The Packers have been (roughly) exchanging the #2 seed and the #7 seed with the Bears.

A W Saturday night will be satisfying on a number of levels. It will show resilience in the face of damaging, long-term injuries. It will make it easier to hold onto the North, given the Bears remaining games v the Niners and Lions.

I think it was gopkrs or milani who wrote that the offense will need to carry the load now, and I agree. It would be huge to get Watson back. He has a significant impact on how opposing CBs and Ss play. But even without him, - Love, Reed, Doubs, Golden and Wicks (and the TEs, who have all played well) have enough talent to win any game. The OL is a crap shoot from week to week, unfortunately.

Losing Parsons is crushing. It does give Cooper a chance to fill the role of lead rusher. We know he can do it. Engabare has been playing v well. I don't really know what has happened to Gary, if anything. The CBs suck, but McKinney and Williams are an excellent at S.

No need to give up! Go into Chicago and get a statement win - and do it for all the guys who are out, oh and for us fans.

It is ironic, in that during the MM-Capers era, we always said getting into the playoffs would happen if the offense carried us. But I actually believe the Bears are in the driver's seat. 2 of their 3 are at home. They are every bit as strong as when they played us 2 weeks ago. On the other hand, the Packers are now on the road and are more depleted by seeing their top D lineman, top receiver, and top O lineman go down. So it comes down to the Packers or Lions for the #7 seed. Seattle and Frisco should be #5 and #6. But stranger things have happened.

 

[Heyjoe4]

LMAO....so many people that are anti-MLF that have screamed about him being too damn conservative now we hear about how dumb it was to throw that ball to Christian (who had two steps on Surtain and was UNDERTHROWN)....

Oh crap...forgot to bold everthing so it is means more...sorry - will do better next time.

The chronic knock on MM was that he played not to lose. It arguably cost the Packers the NFCCG in 2014 in a crushing loss to the Hags. But there were a lot of others involved in that loss as well.

So MLF going for a kill shot using a bomb to Watson is now being mostly criticized. I liked the call, in spite of the disastrous results. There certaily is an argument to be made for still being aggressive at that point, but doing it using the mix of run, pass, RPO MLF had been using successfully to that point.

The Denver D was set up the way MLF wanted, making it a good look for that play.

Anyway, we all know how it ended. That happens. The loss of Parsons was much worse, and a total, non-contact fluke.

The rising calls for MLF's head in the wake of all this are misplaced, if not hysterical.

 

[Heyjoe4]

It is ironic, in that during the MM-Capers era, we always said getting into the playoffs would happen if the offense carried us. But I actually believe the Bears are in the driver's seat. 2 of their 3 are at home. They are every bit as strong as when they played us 2 weeks ago. On the other hand, the Packers are now on the road and are more depleted by seeing their top D lineman, top receiver, and top O lineman go down. So it comes down to the Packers or Lions for the #7 seed. Seattle and Frisco should be #5 and #6. But stranger things have happened.

Yes indeed it will be much harder to beat Chicago after the Denver game. A W will go a long way in quieting all these calls for MLF's head.

 

[Heyjoe4]

I’ve thought about this before. It’s not a perfect metric, but here are all the pro bowlers Gute has drafted in his eight drafts at the helm:

Jaire Alexander (2x)
Rashan Gary (1x)
Elgton Jenkins (2x)

That’s it. I’m guessing Love and maybe Williams will get the nod this year, so that would increase it to five. I don’t know how this compares to other GMs, but on the surface at least, it doesn’t seem like many. The 2020 and 2021 drafts in particular were, with the huge exception of Love, mostly swings and misses.

That being said I probably would not fire Gute or MLF. I think there’s too much risk involved, and Love has developed very well with MLF, for which he certainly deserves a great deal of credit.

Agreed. I don't consider MLF as a top 5 HC, but he's won a lot of games and is getting more aggressive at calling plays. That's a lot more than can be said about his predecessor.

 

[milani]

True. There’s a couple very relevant arguments though. I think part of that strategy was using the “Dan Campbell” approach. If you recall we had just lost our starting RT (and several others). It’s very possible we were thinking about that Bears game. Denver is very similar to the Bears in the way they’ve won games. If you let them hang around they more often than not will close the gap and come out on top. One approach is to put Denver in a position they haven’t seen themselves. Down 3 scores.
THEN.. you flip the switch and go the other approach. It was still earlier 3rd Quarter. Conservative works better in Q4. I’d be very mad at Matt if he took the foot off the gas and went conservative. We’ve won games by trusting Jordan Love, not by using a more timid approach mid Q3 if that makes sense? I’m not suggesting that’s your plan, but had we lost the game trying to run clock in Q3,4 I’m pretty sure even worse sentiment would be directed at MLF.

Matt sais this statement quite often. So I’m assuming it’s an integral part of his overall strategy.

“No Risk..No Reward”.

That philosophy thus far has won a historical number of games. Us older guys remember the 1970’s-80’s. My brother used to use the term accurately. Run-Run-Pass-Punt
Run-Run-Pass-Punt.
Please dear God don’t make mistake again! lol

Yes, it gets to be the irresistible force against the impenetrable wall. But wisdom here has to prevail. Lombardi pointed out that there were plays he would just not use against certain teams with certain defenses. He respected the fact that the opposition might be better in some regard. And Bart Starr did also. He did use play action to go long on 1st down and even on 4th and 1. But those decisions included a lot of careful discretion and film review.

 

[Half Empty]

Couple things and don't take this on you just a response prompted by thoughts reading through your post....but anyone that cites Pro Bowlers as if it has hardly any weight of relevancy in discussing a team build makes me almost stop listening to anything further they say. The Pro Bowl is a joke...the fact uneducated fans actually impact who makes it, eliminates it from any relevancy IMO. It also typically indicates to me that the person is purely a hindsight or reactive judger of things - indicating they've never truly study or researched draft prospect analysis beyond just what the draft ticker says the best available is...because the second you really do dig deeper and study the draft, and follow players careers you begin to see how incredibly hard it is to get perfect, let alone good.

That said I've went down this road before and the irony is the distribution across the league is typically less than a handful per team just by a sheer number....AND pro bowls typically just follow the hot public commodity.

*Sidenote...IF you are going to use Pro Bowlers as a factor in reviewing Gute I don't think you can just look at the draft at all. Gute brought in Josh Jacobs who immediately year one was a pro bowler - same with Xavier McKinney. You cannot overlook that. Zadarius Smith did this too...may be others.

Also have to consider the better or higher honor IMO and to many - that of an All Pro honor. Zach Tom made All Pro in 2024 as did Xavier.

Funny thing is though if you look at the Pro Bowl lists or even the All Pro....you'll see how using it as a metric of real value for judging a GM becomes IMO irrational due to the amount of guys that will make it from bad or mediocre teams I mean shoot the Jets in 2023 had three All Pro and 3 pro bowlers. Cleveland in 2023 had SEVEN pro bowlers....four more than their win total of three games that entire season.

Of course a scouting department and a GM would love to only get All Pro or Pro Bowl level guys (because even if Pro Bowl nods are watered down - they typically don't suck)...but fact is there are only a limited number of each of those spots each year across 32 teams with over 50 guys per. Freaking dynamite guys are going to get snubbed and honestly quite a few a year. Take Jared Verse in 2024 as an example. Dude created the fourth most pressures in the entire league (PFF), his pass rush win rate was incredible BUT only got 6 sacks so it seems the ignorance of voters ignored the fact he produced more QB hurries than Myles Garrett, Chris Jones, Trey Hendrickson and Chase Young. Doesn't diminish the fact Verse was a DYNAMITE pick...or Yaya Diaby drafted in the third in 2023 who has been dynamite but never received awards - doesn't diminish the pick of him at all.

Just some thoughts I had...

Some?

 

[tynimiller]

Some?

If you only knew all the thoughts LOL

 

[milani]

The chronic knock on MM was that he played not to lose. It arguably cost the Packers the NFCCG in 2014 in a crushing loss to the Hags. But there were a lot of others involved in that loss as well.

So MLF going for a kill shot using a bomb to Watson is now being mostly criticized. I liked the call, in spite of the disastrous results. There certaily is an argument to be made for still being aggressive at that point, but doing it using the mix of run, pass, RPO MLF had been using successfully to that point.

The Denver D was set up the way MLF wanted, making it a good look for that play.

Anyway, we all know how it ended. That happens. The loss of Parsons was much worse, and a total, non-contact fluke.

The rising calls for MLF's head in the wake of all this are misplaced, if not hysterical.

That throw was against one of the best CBs in the game. Teams did not make a living throwing at Richard Sherman or Deion Sanders. And they knew what happened when you targeted Herb Adderley.
Now think back to when the Packers DID win in Denver. 1st play after the kickoff in Packer territory. Favre is under center at our 18. He play fakes and takes a big drop back. The Packers knew Jennings in single coverage had the speed to beat Dre Bly. Favre launched it so high and deep that the worst that could happen would be an incompletion. Now that was in sudden death OT. Last Sunday we had a 9 point lead in mid 3rd quarter. We had a lot of time left to play. And we just scored on a 40 yard run from scrimmage. Do we risk going for the long shot and get a TD, or INT, or go 2nd and 10? Or do we try to bring a slow death to that great Denver D?

 

[Magooch]

The whole Gute vs LaFleur question is honestly a really tough one to me.

Now, for starters, the bottom line for me is that three playoff wins in 7/8 years simply isn't good enough.

And I also am not willing to just say that we have been unlucky or snakebit or that we can just blame injuries for this record. There's some truth to some of those claims but they're largely cop-outs that don't adequately explain the matter.

BUT, the trouble for me is that I also don't think we can say "We always lose in the playoffs because of Gute's roster" just like I don't think we can say "We always lose in the playoffs due to coaching".

Now in general...for most of the "Gute-Era," I would say that we have typically had teams/rosters that are "good enough" to compete with anyone and theoretically win it all. In many of these cases we can point towards coaching (either LaFleur himself "directly" or those under his responsibility like Drayton, Barry, etc).

But, at the same time, I think back to Philly in the playoffs last year... Maybe I'm remembering it incorrectly, but I don't feel like LaFleur just got absolutely outcoached by Sirianni... rather it felt like the Eagles were just far more talented/deep than us and we didn't have the players to hang with them. Bisaccia's ST units didn't help any (what else is new) but if you go back, much of the chatter was about how our early round investments in the draft haven't really paid off as well as we'd like, we have a lot of "#2s" but no clear #1 at WR, and just in general that we didn't have enough difference-making players. SO...there's a little blame both directions IMO.

Overall if I absolutely HAD to divvy up "blame" between coaching staff and roster construction/GM, over the last 7-8 years I would say the responsibility/blame for our postseason record is probably like 35% GM, 65% coaching for me. Does that mean it's time to move on from one/both? I really have no idea lol

 

[Poppa San]

It was 1st down and Denver was thinking we run the ball.

Wouldn't this then be the perfect time for a deep pass?

 

[Wayne G]

Go check the facts on this:

The Packer D which peiple say has been so good.....they are close to terrible in the second half of games! Offense as well.

The coaching staff... Lafluer and Hafley cannot/have not matched other teams 2nd half adjustments! Almosy every game.

This alone should be enough to make changes.

 

[Wayne G]

By almost every metric most use to measure coaches MLF is one of the best. Now if your one of the best is only a 3 deep group or 5 sure arguments there to be made he is out of it but otherwise almost EVERY knowledgeable person in football knows MLF is one of the best.

Now you did bring up one of the BIGGEST critiques that has immense merit and that is his loyalty to his staff to a fault. It is TREMENDOUSLY powerful to know your boss or those over you believe in you, MLF absolutely conveys that to his staff - BUT he has went too far with this affecting accountability within the staff. Rich needed one of his two titles stripped in the offseason - to send a message to him but the rest of the staff that medocrity isn't going to cut it. Rich continually puts forth STs that struggle to be above the bottom 1/3 in the league in many stats which would be argued as most crucial to judging them - he is also by title the assistant head coach. I think if the players respect him like it seems they do, remove him as ST Coordinator and keep on staff in a diminished role as direct assistant to MLF as Assistant Head Coach AT MOST what Rich should do for us.

MLF is one of the best in the league though absolutely.

Again.....2nd half...after Denver made adjustments Lafluer and Hafley couldnt do same....this has been an ongoing problem!

This is Lafluers 7th year.....no championships....AND.. he had MVP Rodgers to boot.

I feel confident Lafluer is done in GB.

 

[tynimiller]

Again.....2nd half...after Denver made adjustments Lafluer and Hafley couldnt do same....this has been an ongoing problem!

This is Lafluers 7th year.....no championships....AND.. he had MVP Rodgers to boot.

I feel confident Lafluer is done in GB.

I love how folks judge purely off the outcome that one staff didn't do **** and the other staff were wizards.

Hafley's defense in two straight times gave the ball back to our offense after CRUCIAL fourth down stops against one of the best teams in the league, at their house and against one of the best coaches to many...just a blind squirrel finding a nut though I'm sure. Hafley likely hadn't changed or responded to things seen at all to make that happen....

Even if say Policy after this season walks from MLF...I guarantee it isn't because he's sick of MLF and Hafley refusing to change, amend or adjust at all in games...because literally NO coach behaves like that.

 

[milani]

The whole Gute vs LaFleur question is honestly a really tough one to me.

Now, for starters, the bottom line for me is that three playoff wins in 7/8 years simply isn't good enough.

And I also am not willing to just say that we have been unlucky or snakebit or that we can just blame injuries for this record. There's some truth to some of those claims but they're largely cop-outs that don't adequately explain the matter.

BUT, the trouble for me is that I also don't think we can say "We always lose in the playoffs because of Gute's roster" just like I don't think we can say "We always lose in the playoffs due to coaching".

Now in general...for most of the "Gute-Era," I would say that we have typically had teams/rosters that are "good enough" to compete with anyone and theoretically win it all. In many of these cases we can point towards coaching (either LaFleur himself "directly" or those under his responsibility like Drayton, Barry, etc).

But, at the same time, I think back to Philly in the playoffs last year... Maybe I'm remembering it incorrectly, but I don't feel like LaFleur just got absolutely outcoached by Sirianni... rather it felt like the Eagles were just far more talented/deep than us and we didn't have the players to hang with them. Bisaccia's ST units didn't help any (what else is new) but if you go back, much of the chatter was about how our early round investments in the draft haven't really paid off as well as we'd like, we have a lot of "#2s" but no clear #1 at WR, and just in general that we didn't have enough difference-making players. SO...there's a little blame both directions IMO.

Overall if I absolutely HAD to divvy up "blame" between coaching staff and roster construction/GM, over the last 7-8 years I would say the responsibility/blame for our postseason record is probably like 35% GM, 65% coaching for me. Does that mean it's time to move on from one/both? I really have no idea lol

We should have definitely gone farther in those playoffs from 2019-2021 while we had Rodgers and, to an extent, Adams and Bahk. The last 2 seasons we carried the youngest team into the postseason. Our opponents were simply superior. In fact, we should not have beaten the Cowboys. But we did. McCarthy might have had a future still in Dallas had he won that game and gone ahead from there.

 

[Sanguine camper]

Again.....2nd half...after Denver made adjustments Lafluer and Hafley couldnt do same....this has been an ongoing problem!

This is Lafluers 7th year.....no championships....AND.. he had MVP Rodgers to boot.

I feel confident Lafluer is done in GB.

I wouldn't bet on MFL being done in GB. The Packers give their coaches every benefit of the doubt. All you need to do is look at the tenure of Joe Barry and Mo Drayton to convince yourself that coaches are frequently held beyond their due date.

Sticking with coaches too long goes back to the Mike McCarthy era too. After the humiliating collapse in the 2014 NFCCG, anybody that looked at similar situations like the Houston Oilers knew that teams don't come back from those types of collapses. It takes a house cleaning to get the stink out. The 2016 Atlanta Falcons never rebounded from their SB choke. The Packers stuck with MM and Capers another futile 4 seasons.

As long as Matt sniffs the playoffs, I think he knows he can keep his job. He doesn't strike me that he's worried about being fired.

 

[gopkrs]

Just wanted to comment on the playing not to lose and going for it. Playing not to lose or just running so the other guys have to use their time outs sucks. You still have to stop them. Definitely try for the first down. But going for it does not mean throwing a bomb to do it. You can go for it with higher percentage plays. Sending someone long, especially if he takes two defenders, makes sense. Just look for someone else imho.

 

[rmontro]

Tier 2 Freaking Good

Lafluer

Sounds fair.
He did impress me earlier in the year when the offense was getting stagnant and his play calling too conservative. He did adjust to it and emphasized the passing game more. It's nice to see when a coach can adjust, some just dig in deeper.

 

[adambr2]

J.J. Watt says he would have signed for $5 million to play for the Green Bay Packers

According to J.J. Watt, the Green Bay Packers never even gave him an offer after they learned about his interest.

sports.yahoo.com

Reading this is probably enough to get me on the “Fire Gute” train. This is egregious.

 

[Sanguine camper]

When Lafleur first took over in 2019 I was impressed that he sent Mike Daniel's packing when he showed up out-of-shape. I was hoping that he could change the culture of the franchise.

Over time, unfortunately, the team has reverted to being unfocused and soft. They'll play a good quarter or two and then lose all intensity and focus making stupid penalties, drop passes and miss assignments.

Given the talent on the roster, sometimes one or two good quarters will still win a game but it sure is frustrating knowing that the team rarely plays to its potential.

I think most people agree that LaFleur is a good offensive mind. His offenses sometimes sputter but are usually pretty efficient. It's the other aspects of being a head coach where he struggles. I would say the team usually plays beneath its talent level.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Some?

Whenever someone uses. the word "but" you can safely disregard all comments that come before it.

The whole Gute vs LaFleur question is honestly a really tough one to me.

Now, for starters, the bottom line for me is that three playoff wins in 7/8 years simply isn't good enough.

And I also am not willing to just say that we have been unlucky or snakebit or that we can just blame injuries for this record. There's some truth to some of those claims but they're largely cop-outs that don't adequately explain the matter.

BUT, the trouble for me is that I also don't think we can say "We always lose in the playoffs because of Gute's roster" just like I don't think we can say "We always lose in the playoffs due to coaching".

Now in general...for most of the "Gute-Era," I would say that we have typically had teams/rosters that are "good enough" to compete with anyone and theoretically win it all. In many of these cases we can point towards coaching (either LaFleur himself "directly" or those under his responsibility like Drayton, Barry, etc).

But, at the same time, I think back to Philly in the playoffs last year... Maybe I'm remembering it incorrectly, but I don't feel like LaFleur just got absolutely outcoached by Sirianni... rather it felt like the Eagles were just far more talented/deep than us and we didn't have the players to hang with them. Bisaccia's ST units didn't help any (what else is new) but if you go back, much of the chatter was about how our early round investments in the draft haven't really paid off as well as we'd like, we have a lot of "#2s" but no clear #1 at WR, and just in general that we didn't have enough difference-making players. SO...there's a little blame both directions IMO.

Overall if I absolutely HAD to divvy up "blame" between coaching staff and roster construction/GM, over the last 7-8 years I would say the responsibility/blame for our postseason record is probably like 35% GM, 65% coaching for me. Does that mean it's time to move on from one/both? I really have no idea lol

I like your reasoning here Magooch. Very balanced, looking at both sides of the discussion.

And any discussion of a coaching or GM change should be in the context of just how hard it is to win a SB. Last year's SB win was only the 2nd for Philly, while the Packers have 4 (and not counting all the championships that came before the SB era). The Bears have 1, and the Lions and Queens total SB victories = zero.

And I think your 35%/65? responsibility breakdown is accurate. That probably would have been 25/75, but Gluten did not do well in FA with Hobbs and Banks, and has to be dinged for that.

My biggest complaints against LaFleur were 1) playing too carefully with a lead, that is, playing not to lose and 2) poor clock management.

From what I've seen this year, MLF has stayed aggressive for all 60 minutes. As banged up and tired as the team must have been Sunday, they still had the ball with a chance to tie late in the game. So they did force Denver to give the ball back for one more try - even if a longshot. MLF's clock management is still shaky.

As for whether it's time to move on from Gluten or MLF, I'm firmly in the "No" camp. Policy and Ball are gonna have to get creative in the post season to draft extensions for these guys. That said, I have no idea what those contracts would look like as far as length of extension.

 

[Heyjoe4]

When Lafleur first took over in 2019 I was impressed that he sent Mike Daniel's packing when he showed up out-of-shape. I was hoping that he could change the culture of the franchise.

Over time, unfortunately, the team has reverted to being unfocused and soft. They'll play a good quarter or two and then lose all intensity and focus making stupid penalties, drop passes and miss assignments.

Given the talent on the roster, sometimes one or two good quarters will still win a game but it sure is frustrating knowing that the team rarely plays to its potential.

I think most people agree that LaFleur is a good offensive mind. His offenses sometimes sputter but are usually pretty efficient. It's the other aspects of being a head coach where he struggles. I would say the team usually plays beneath its talent level.

You have a point here Sanguine. This year injuries are a legitimate reason for not reaching the SB. That's not the same as saying they can't do it. Even with all the injuries (and it looks like Watson will be back this weekend), there is plenty of talent. And I think most would agree that injuries aren't a very good excuse in the NFL.

I temper my expectations for a SB. I also expect a solid playoff showing. Those two things aren't mutually exclusive. It starts with a W Saturday night in Chicago. MLF has an opportunity to show that he can win through injuries. That applies to Gluten as well - all the guys playing are there because of him - it's a classic "next man up" scenario.

Now no one will adequately replace Parsons. But one week prior to the season opener, before Parsons, it's fair to say we were all optimistic about the season. They still have enough of that talent for a decent playoff run, IMO.

 

[Sanguine camper]

You have a point here Sanguine. This year injuries are a legitimate reason for not reaching the SB. That's not the same as saying they can't do it. Even with all the injuries (and it looks like Watson will be back this weekend), there is plenty of talent. And I think most would agree that injuries aren't a very good excuse in the NFL.

I temper my expectations for a SB. I also expect a solid playoff showing. Those two things aren't mutually exclusive. It starts with a W Saturday night in Chicago. MLF has an opportunity to show that he can win through injuries. That applies to Gluten as well - all the guys playing are there because of him - it's a classic "next man up" scenario.

Now no one will adequately replace Parsons. But one week prior to the season opener, before Parsons, it's fair to say we were all optimistic about the season. They still have enough of that talent for a decent playoff run, IMO.

I would say that injuries make a huge difference. When they habitually hit your best players, then it's doubtful it's all just random bad luck that should exonerate everybody in the front office from responsibility.

No Parsons, no Wyatt, no Kraft and Jenkins. There is no 'next man up' to replace Parsons. He's a HOF talent. Wyatt is a decent pass rusher. There's no other IDL on the roster even close to him. Can the Packers rise up to beat teams like the Bears with middling QB's? Sure, it's possible. Can they go through a playoff run where they'll be facing good QB play without a pass rush? Very unlikely.

The pass rush was faltering this past month with Parsons because of the poor play by the rest of the defense. Without him and Wyatt, will a pass rush magically now appear?

There's a threshold where injuries just wreck seasons. Just ask the 2020 Niners, the 2021 Packers and 2024 Lions about that.

 

[milani]

I wouldn't bet on MFL being done in GB. The Packers give their coaches every benefit of the doubt. All you need to do is look at the tenure of Joe Barry and Mo Drayton to convince yourself that coaches are frequently held beyond their due date.

Sticking with coaches too long goes back to the Mike McCarthy era too. After the humiliating collapse in the 2014 NFCCG, anybody that looked at similar situations like the Houston Oilers knew that teams don't come back from those types of collapses. It takes a house cleaning to get the stink out. The 2016 Atlanta Falcons never rebounded from their SB choke. The Packers stuck with MM and Capers another futile 4 seasons.

As long as Matt sniffs the playoffs, I think he knows he can keep his job. He doesn't strike me that he's worried about being fired.

You would have to see a big collapse, such as 2018 under MM, before that would happen.

 

[milani]

I would say that injuries make a huge difference. When they habitually hit your best players, then it's doubtful it's all just random bad luck that should exonerate everybody in the front office from responsibility.

No Parsons, no Wyatt, no Kraft and Jenkins. There is no 'next man up' to replace Parsons. He's a HOF talent. Wyatt is a decent pass rusher. There's no other IDL on the roster even close to him. Can the Packers rise up to beat teams like the Bears with middling QB's? Sure, it's possible. Can they go through a playoff run where they'll be facing good QB play without a pass rush? Very unlikely.

The pass rush was faltering this past month with Parsons because of the poor play by the rest of the defense. Without him and Wyatt, will a pass rush magically now appear?

There's a threshold where injuries just wreck seasons. Just ask the 2020 Niners, the 2021 Packers and 2024 Lions about that.

The Lions lost Hutchinson in 2024 and it hurt them defensively the rest of the way. And as other defensive starters went down the offense could not do it all like they did to get to 15-2.