Fire Matt LaFleur

[rmontro]

Can the Packers rise up to beat teams like the Bears with middling QB's?

The Bears don't need great QB play to win though, if their run game is successful enough. Just need a game manager type, and he is hard to sack.

 

[milani]

The Bears don't need great QB play to win though, if their run game is successful enough. Just need a game manager type, and he is hard to sack.

Plus the fact that their " middling QB " keeps getting better and developing each and every time he starts. This is not the same rookie that began in Sept. 2024. And the Bears D can win if it does what it does best. IE. Takeaways

 

[Sanguine camper]

If you keep CW in the pocket, his accuracy isn't impressive. If there's one team where losing Parsons could be tolerable and pass rush may not be as important, it could be the Bears. Keep CW in the pocket and make him beat you with his arm. He's 'middling' if you can keep him from scrambling too much.

 

[milani]

If you keep CW in the pocket, his accuracy isn't impressive. If there's one team where losing Parsons could be tolerable and pass rush may not be as important, it could be the Bears. Keep CW in the pocket and make him beat you with his arm. He's 'middling' if you can keep him from scrambling too much.

What he will do is just play action under center drop back and drill one through the heart of the defense. Now he may not have all his weapons this week so he will look for Kmet. The other choice he has is to take off right up the middle. You have to attempt to force him to throw too soon. He did that earlier in his rookie year but he is much more polished now.

 

[Sanguine camper]

I think the Bears used play action to bait the defensive ends to react as if the play was a run. It allows CW to escape the pocket easily where he's a big threat to run. CW can also throw on the run quite well. The ends need to play very disciplined vs the Bears or CW will just run for a first down and keep the defense on the field the whole game.

What he will do is just play action under center drop back and drill one through the heart of the defense. Now he may not have all his weapons this week so he will look for Kmet. The other choice he has is to take off right up the middle. You have to attempt to force him to throw too soon. He did that earlier in his rookie year but he is much more polished now.

 

[Heyjoe4]

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.

Agreed Sanguine and that's exactly what I meant by "tempering" my expectations for the playoffs this year (and yes, they still have to win to make the playoffs).

As you note, this is what happened to the Lions last year. They still managed to get a playoff bye on a 15-2 record, but that couldn't mask the massive injuries on their defense. Washington had little trouble beating them in the NFC semi-final game.

For this season, I would be happy with a playoff berth, ideally as the #3 seed, and one playoff win at home. Given the injuries, that would be a solid season. Sounds like Watson is back, and for a team that will need to win with offense, that's a great relief.

 

[Heyjoe4]

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.

I think they lost something like 5 or 6 starters on D by the playoffs. It's incredible they managed to win 15 games, but Goff had a career year and their offense carried them. Now, with Hutchinson and other injured players back, they are not currently in the playoffs.

The NFL is fickle. Take what you can when you can.

 

[Heyjoe4]

I think the Bears used play action to bait the defensive ends to react as if the play was a run. It allows CW to escape the pocket easily where he's a big threat to run. CW can also throw on the run quite well. The ends need to play very disciplined vs the Bears or CW will just run for a first down and keep the defense on the field the whole game.

The knock on CW is a very low completion rate. But when he gets outside the pocket, which is a lot, he's dangerous. He threw some dimes when they played the Packers, and he is always a threat to run. But he mostly rolls to his right, or at least he did against GB.

So the D ends are going to have to seal the edges and forgo sacks. (I don't think he was sacked in the game two weeks ago, with a healthy Parsons.)

My biggest concern is the poor play of the CBs. As you note, CW can drop back in the pocket (much easier with Parsons gone) and cut up the weak zone defense. And that sets up RPO for Swift and Monangai.

I still think the Packers win this one, say 24 - 20, something like that, a 3 or 4-point win. I'd predict a higher score but it's December along the lake in Chicago. The game will be won by the better offense, so I like the Packers' chances.

 

[Heyjoe4]

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

Agreed. And if he were by some chance fired, he'd have a HC job inside of a week. The Packers FO, Gluten, and MLF will have their hands full replacing Hafley anyway.

I do agree with Sanguine, the Packers have traditionally held onto coaches way too long. MM should have been gone after the 2014 NFCCG collapse to the Hags. How did a guy like Joe Barry last so long at DC?

All that history aside, there is just no case to be made for whacking MLF after the season. A lot of very good coaches with very good teams haven't won a SB. Just ask Kyle Shanahan or Dan Campbell. They still have their jobs for a reason.

 

[Sanguine camper]

Agreed Sanguine and that's exactly what I meant by "tempering" my expectations for the playoffs this year (and yes, they still have to win to make the playoffs).

As you note, this is what happened to the Lions last year. They still managed to get a playoff bye on a 15-2 record, but that couldn't mask the massive injuries on their defense. Washington had little trouble beating them in the NFC semi-final game.

For this season, I would be happy with a playoff berth, ideally as the #3 seed, and one playoff win at home. Given the injuries, that would be a solid season. Sounds like Watson is back, and for a team that will need to win with offense, that's a great relief.

Win or lose, any game is meaningful under the lense of roster evaluation.

I have my doubts that making it to the playoffs and losing has much value at this stage. We've frequently seen that before. Is it a springboard to something better? Perhaps with very young teams that are still in the building process.

The Packers have rebuilt and are now in the win now mode with the Parsons transformation. I would use the next three games to test players that are on the roster bubble.

Van Ness should get Parsons' snaps. If he delivers, them maybe a fifth year option could be on the table. If he disappears, well then the Packers know they can move on from him. That's valuable information. Same for Morgan. Put him at LT and let's see what he can do.

Just because roster evaluation becomes more important doesn't mean an automatic loss. Sometimes a team will just give you a win on a platter like the Chargers did 2 years ago.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

MLF needs to be fired , he has a winning percent of wins but cant never win the big one because he gets out coached all the time , they got out coached by Broncos HC yesterday, they were winning 23 to 14 and MLF had no business calling a long pass instead of controlling the ball with short passes but instead the momentum shifted after that play , injured the one of the best player we have, and we lost
The Packers will never win a SB with MLF as HC , he has been the Packers coach about 7 yrs and always chokes in big games , he has now great talent , as before but he cant win the big one , they will not get far this season with MLF in charge, hopefully the new guy in charge at Green Bay(Ed Policy)will not extend his contract and let him go , MLF is a good offensive coordinator , not a HC .
I love the Packers , i been a Packer fan all my life 62 yrs of it , the truth hurts, lets bring in a coach that will not choke when it gets tough , MLF is not the guy and the talent is been wasted with this guy

Dude, you don't need to yell, you already look silly with your content.

By your thinking, 31 coaches would be fired at the end of each NFL year.

BTW, Ed Policy wouldn't be the one to fire MLF, that would be Gute's job.

I get your frustration with the Packers not going 17-0 and winning a SB every season, but if the other 31 fan bases had your same viewpoint, the stadiums would be empty.

For those that want Gute to fire MLF, who should he replace him with? "Anyone better" is not a valid answer.

This whole "The Packers are wasting talent" argument that people use is hilarious.

I blame the whole situation on not having proper pad level.

 

[DoURant]

I blame the whole situation on not having proper pad level.

...and better fundamentals

 

[gopkrs]

Win or lose, any game is meaningful under the lense of roster evaluation.

I have my doubts that making it to the playoffs and losing has much value at this stage. We've frequently seen that before. Is it a springboard to something better? Perhaps with very young teams that are still in the building process.

The Packers have rebuilt and are now in the win now mode with the Parsons transformation. I would use the next three games to test players that are on the roster bubble.

Van Ness should get Parsons' snaps. If he delivers, them maybe a fifth year option could be on the table. If he disappears, well then the Packers know they can move on from him. That's valuable information. Same for Morgan. Put him at LT and let's see what he can do.

Just because roster evaluation becomes more important doesn't mean an automatic loss. Sometimes a team will just give you a win on a platter like the Chargers did 2 years ago.

Agreed. But not so much with maybe the games not being important. So have a quick pull if they don't do well. And try a different game later until you see what you need to.

 

[milani]

Agreed Sanguine and that's exactly what I meant by "tempering" my expectations for the playoffs this year (and yes, they still have to win to make the playoffs).

As you note, this is what happened to the Lions last year. They still managed to get a playoff bye on a 15-2 record, but that couldn't mask the massive injuries on their defense. Washington had little trouble beating them in the NFC semi-final game.

For this season, I would be happy with a playoff berth, ideally as the #3 seed, and one playoff win at home. Given the injuries, that would be a solid season. Sounds like Watson is back, and for a team that will need to win with offense, that's a great relief.

Lions gave up 40 to the Commanders and had turnovers as well. The other time they were rung up for over 40 was by tge Bills but it was close.

 

[rmontro]

BTW, Ed Policy wouldn't be the one to fire MLF, that would be Gute's job.

Is that really the case? Mark Murphy reserved the right to fire the head coach for himself, and he was the one who fired Mike McCarthy. Did he pass that on to Ed Policy?

 

[OldSchool101]

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?

I will offer that GB was running the ball effectively against Denver. Common logic is the later in the game it gets, the more the Defense gets worn down. At that time we were putting up 6.0 per rush against a very good Denver Defense. In hindsight we probably could’ve went conservative and run it until they showed they could stop us effectively. Although if that Watson bomb is 1.5 yards longer it’s a quick TD. Possibly a 2pt conversion look there and that puts us up 17 points. Very high probability we line up 6 OL and just bully Denver on the ground, burn clock and reduce any chances of throwing another INT. I doubt Denver would’ve come back from Down 16-0 or 17-0 point spread mid 3rd qtr.

This is very similar to the concept when we played at Philly in the Wildcard. There’s no reason to try and field the opening kickoff. A mistake there only gets their fans involved and in a lower scoring game becomes even a bigger hurdle. Just let the ball roll and start at our 35 yard line as Nixon fielded it -1 into the Paint Take the +35 yard line there and benefit from the new rule! Totally different situation if it lands at the 2 yardline.
Had Nixon not fumbled the ball and been instructed to take an +35 if it’s there? Even on a 3 out for 8 yards, Whelan punts high from the GB43 to around the Philly 10 has to start on their own 15-20 yardline vs a quick TD strike and getting the ball 1st in Q3.
If nothing else, it changes that possession to a Punt and it’s a 10-12 or 10-15 score in Q4 at Philly and it’s a completely different ballgame. Without just the fumble on the opening play, GB was still in that game to the end. and that’s even if we threw 3 INT. Keep in mind we had -4 Turnovers there. GB last drive was 1st n 10 at the GB43 with 2:15 on the clock. It’s 4-down territory with plenty of time to run the clock off. Either a FG or TD wins and you need to burn as close to 2 minutes there. Logically you run the ball and force Philly to itch and burn their timeouts. It’s amazing how that opening fumble changed the games entire complexity. Philly wasn’t that much better than us, we had more 1st downs and within 30 yards of total offense.

 

[milani]

I will offer that GB was running the ball effectively against Denver. Common logic is the later in the game it gets, the more the Defense gets worn down. At that time we were putting up 6.0 per rush against a very good Denver Defense. In hindsight we probably could’ve went conservative and run it until they showed they could stop us effectively. Although if that Watson bomb is 1.5 yards longer it’s a quick TD. Possibly a 2pt conversion look there and that puts us up 17 points.
I doubt Denver would’ve come back from that just imo.

This is very similar to the concept when we played at Philly in the Wildcard. There’s no reason to try and field the opening kickoff. A mistake there only gets their fans into it. Just let the ball roll and start at our 35 yard line as Nixon fielded it in the Paint. Take the 35 yard line there and benefit from the new rule! Totally different situation if it lands at the 2 yardline.
Had we not fumbled the ball or even just picked flailed a little and picked up 8 yards and punted in 4th n2 etc? Philly has to start on their own 15-20 yardline vs a quick TD strike and getting the ball 1st in Q3.

If nothing else changes that exchange was a punt, it’s a 10-12 score in Q4 at Philly and it’s a completely different ballgame.

Putting up points AND using clock against Denver are easier said than done. Throwing the ball and keeping the pressure on worked against Detroit, but their defense is not Denver's. Now driving for the winning score against the Bears involved both run and pass. But ultimately it was Jacobs that had the runs that gave us the go ahead score.
Against Denver our rushing game was pretty much exclusively Jacobs and he did it on his own without great blocking.
I know MLF realized that we needed Jacobs to deliver but he also knew that his knee was playing hurt. Too many reps and it jeopardizes the last 3 weeks.
Bear in mind that we think a 16 or 17 point lead is too much for the Broncos to overcome late. Look what they did in Philly in the 4th quarter. And they came back against the Gmen with 33 points in the 4th quarter.

 

[OldSchool101]

If you keep CW in the pocket, his accuracy isn't impressive. If there's one team where losing Parsons could be tolerable and pass rush may not be as important, it could be the Bears. Keep CW in the pocket and make him beat you with his arm. He's 'middling' if you can keep him from scrambling too much.

I agree. Caleb has not been as accurate staying in the pocket and going through progressions. Where he’s most lethal is rolling right. He loves to fake step into the pocket. It’s a ploy to get the Edge to wrap inside. Do not wrap inside and give him Right leverage whatsover at any level. THAT is where he can use his short area quickness to roll out and buy himself 3-4 seconds. That’s his comfort zone. He burned us the same way 2 weeks ago rolling Right and allowing extra time for Coverage to breakdown and waiting for his guys to get open.

Setting the Edges and keeping him contained in the pocket is ideal. Make him go through all his progressions as well we slowly and methodically pinch him together from front Center or to HIS left (Gary Left and LVN/Enagbare on his Right setting a hard Edge. Numero Uno is focus on mitigating Caleb from rolling right.

We can’t continue allowing him to bait us with his “ fake step up” only to bounce to his strong suit. This has been a common theme on film for weeks and its a punishing outcome.

If he runs it’s forward Center. Toward our LB’s.

If he throws its QB pocket or rolling left, where it’s hard for any QB to throw across lanes of traffic.

 

[milani]

I agree. Caleb has not been as accurate staying in the pocket and going through progressions. Where he’s most lethal is rolling right. He loves to fake step into the pocket. It’s a ploy to get the Edge to wrap inside where he can use his short area quickness to roll out and buy himself 3-4 seconds. That’s his comfort zone. He burned us the same way 2 weeks ago rolling Right and allowing extra time for Coverage to breakdown and waiting for his guys to get open.

Setting the Edges and keeping him contained in the pocket is ideal. Make him go through all his progressions as well we slowly and methodically pinch him together. Numero Uno is focus on mitigating Caleb from rolling right.

We can’t continue allowing him to bait us with his “ fake step up” only to bounce to his strong suit. This has been a common theme on film for weeks and its a punishing outcome.

I’d Keep a DE like Enagbare back and outside ti his Right. Force Caleb to be extra patient (which is his Kryptonite) because he’s exceptionally jumpy in the pocket. He doesn’t have Rodgers footwork yet and he gets anxious and springs outside like a Rookie. At worst allow him to Run straight ahead into the Loving arms of Quay coming downhill.

Some of his out of pocket is by design because he throws well on the run and also has the speed to turn the corner. He is a playmaker. But he has to be careful. JJ McCarthy has tried to play that style in his short NFL career and it has sidelined him plenty. Caleb is not easily replaceable.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Win or lose, any game is meaningful under the lense of roster evaluation.

I have my doubts that making it to the playoffs and losing has much value at this stage. We've frequently seen that before. Is it a springboard to something better? Perhaps with very young teams that are still in the building process.

The Packers have rebuilt and are now in the win now mode with the Parsons transformation. I would use the next three games to test players that are on the roster bubble.

Van Ness should get Parsons' snaps. If he delivers, them maybe a fifth year option could be on the table. If he disappears, well then the Packers know they can move on from him. That's valuable information. Same for Morgan. Put him at LT and let's see what he can do.

Just because roster evaluation becomes more important doesn't mean an automatic loss. Sometimes a team will just give you a win on a platter like the Chargers did 2 years ago.

I agree that this season was considered "win now" even before the Parsons trade. Adding Parsons increased the chances to get to and win a SB. Along with Kraft, Wyatt, Jenkins - and Parsons - a SB appearance or win are unlikely. Certainly not impossibe, but unlikely.

It is still an opportunity, as you mention - "I would use the next three games to test players that are on the roster bubble."

Exactly. This is a time for guys to get a lot more snaps than usual, and a chance to prove their worth to the team (or as a trade).

I'm not diminishing the loss of Parsons. I actually felt sick when he went down. But that's life in pro football. The Packers still have a wealth of talent, and Watson, it seems, was not seriously injured. A big W in Chicago tonight is just the right medicine after the deflating game in Denver.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Some of his out of pocket is by design because he throws well on the run and also has the speed to turn the corner. He is a playmaker. But he has to be careful. JJ McCarthy has tried to play that style in his short NFL career and it has sidelined him plenty. Caleb is not easily replaceable.

CW is hard to figure out. As you note, he can be deadly accurate while throwing on the run, and he's always a threat to take off if the opportunity is there.

I think the best strategy tonight is to keep the edges sealed and forgo sacks. He wasn't sacked once in the last game with Parsons playing. I still expect Hafley to get aggressive at times and blitz Cooper, Walker, McKinney, Williams (if healthy) and keep the Bears in check.

Easier said than done. By now, the team should have gotten over the shock of losing Parsons, and be ready for an always-huge game against the Bears. Packers 24, Bears 14. Make it so Matt!

 

[Heyjoe4]

I will offer that GB was running the ball effectively against Denver. Common logic is the later in the game it gets, the more the Defense gets worn down. At that time we were putting up 6.0 per rush against a very good Denver Defense. In hindsight we probably could’ve went conservative and run it until they showed they could stop us effectively. Although if that Watson bomb is 1.5 yards longer it’s a quick TD. Possibly a 2pt conversion look there and that puts us up 17 points. Very high probability we line up 6 OL and just bully Denver on the ground, burn clock and reduce any chances of throwing another INT. I doubt Denver would’ve come back from Down 16-0 or 17-0 point spread mid 3rd qtr.

This is very similar to the concept when we played at Philly in the Wildcard. There’s no reason to try and field the opening kickoff. A mistake there only gets their fans involved and in a lower scoring game becomes even a bigger hurdle. Just let the ball roll and start at our 35 yard line as Nixon fielded it -1 into the Paint Take the +35 yard line there and benefit from the new rule! Totally different situation if it lands at the 2 yardline.
Had Nixon not fumbled the ball and been instructed to take an +35 if it’s there? Even on a 3 out for 8 yards, Whelan punts high from the GB43 to around the Philly 10 has to start on their own 15-20 yardline vs a quick TD strike and getting the ball 1st in Q3.
If nothing else, it changes that possession to a Punt and it’s a 10-12 or 10-15 score in Q4 at Philly and it’s a completely different ballgame. Without just the fumble on the opening play, GB was still in that game to the end. and that’s even if we threw 3 INT. Keep in mind we had -4 Turnovers there. GB last drive was 1st n 10 at the GB43 with 2:15 on the clock. It’s 4-down territory with plenty of time to run the clock off. Either a FG or TD wins and you need to burn as close to 2 minutes there. Logically you run the ball and force Philly to itch and burn their timeouts. It’s amazing how that opening fumble changed the games entire complexity. Philly wasn’t that much better than us, we had more 1st downs and within 30 yards of total offense.

Yeah OS the Packers were doing everything right against Denver. All the momentum collapsed in Q3 after the Surtain INT and Watson leaving the game. It only got worse from there......

But that was last week. I expect the team to be pumped for a rematch with the Bears and come away with a 24-14 win.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Lions gave up 40 to the Commanders and had turnovers as well. The other time they were rung up for over 40 was by tge Bills but it was close.

It was kinda amazing that the Lions went 15-2 last season with so many injuries on D. But that was all exposed in the loss to the Commanders. The Commanders did have a good team last year. I think the Lions were caught looking ahead.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Is that really the case? Mark Murphy reserved the right to fire the head coach for himself, and he was the one who fired Mike McCarthy. Did he pass that on to Ed Policy?

Yeah, I stand corrected. Seems Policy would be the one to fire MLF.

 

[Sanguine camper]

CW is hard to figure out. As you note, he can be deadly accurate while throwing on the run, and he's always a threat to take off if the opportunity is there.

I think the best strategy tonight is to keep the edges sealed and forgo sacks. He wasn't sacked once in the last game with Parsons playing. I still expect Hafley to get aggressive at times and blitz Cooper, Walker, McKinney, Williams (if healthy) and keep the Bears in check.

Easier said than done. By now, the team should have gotten over the shock of losing Parsons, and be ready for an always-huge game against the Bears. Packers 24, Bears 14. Make it so Matt!

If the Packers come out flat tonight who can blame them. Certainly losing Parsons is hugely deflating. Are the Bears a big enough 'rivalry' to lift the team's spirits? Maybe but if not, I won't be surprised. When Rodgers went out with collar bone injuries, the Packers struggled. Those were different players but a similar situation.