Fire Matt LaFleur

[adambr2]

$118M dead cap to sign a guy isn't happening. Want to say I wish Willis was our QB long term, great.. can have that discussion, but you threw out an idea that isn't even remotely feasible.

It’s a fun thought experiment to think “what would our outlook be if we gave Willis somewhere between high end backup money to a Justin Fields deal (maybe 2 years/$30M), gave him the key to the car the next 2 years, and traded Love for whatever the market is (my guess is somewhere in the ballpark of three 1sts).

Would this work, would we find success? I have no doubt that JL is the better QB, but Willis really does seem to be the better fit for the type of offense that MLF wants to run.

You’re right though, the dead cap issue ends all hypotheticals right there. If we were two years further down the road, it would be a more realistic discussion.

 

[Heyjoe4]

I don't live on these boards true, but, what does any of that matter? I have been here 14 years if that counts for anything.

Anyway, I am serious as my posts from prior years will attest. Never been a Love fan from the beginning, hated the draft pick at the time. At times I've doubted my assessment of Love, he has had some good games. But, overall I don't think he's ever going to lead this team anywhere, no elite traits. To this day, six years in, he has yet to lead the team to a division title as a starter, yet around here people keep talking about Super Bowls. And spare me the hogwash about his first three years on the bench...he wasn't good enough to start anyway...meanwhile guys like Williams, Maye, Hurts, Purdy, Nix, etc. are getting the job done in their first three seasons.

Love's career will mimic Cousins, IMO. Some good regular season stats on and off, but, that's the ceiling.

At least Willis has some elite traits, beautiful mechanics, escapability, etc., as noted in my original post.

You can research the cap yourself if it matters to you, but, cutting Gary, Jenkins and other dead weight should make moving on from Love possible.

Interesting comments SY, thanks. Haven't heard from you in a while so it's good to see you back.

I was a Love doubter since he was drafted and until he became the starter. His play since becoming a starter has changed that opinion. I think he's a good QB. I don't see him carrying a team in crunch time the way Rodgers and Favre could do.

While elite QB play is almost essential for a SB appearance or win, it's sufficient, not necessary. The Packers have a ton of talent around Love. And I don't doubt Love's ability to be a solid starter in the NFL. I expected a SB run before the season began, and that was before the Parsons trade. Injuries have truly made a SB unlikely. Que sera, sera.

IMO, Love doesn't display the characteristics of a leader in the way Rodgers and Favre did. He always has a poker face on, whether he throws a TD or INT. Jacobs is the leader of the offense, the heart and soul. So with Love at QB, it's gonna require outstanding play from the defense. If/when Gluten solves the CB problem, the D will be elite.

And finding someone else to play QB isn't easy. Yes they could cut some dead weight - and I agree that Gary and Jenkins qualify - but cap isn't the issue - it's finding someone who can play at an elite level in the first place. Those guys are rare.

Anyway, welcome back SY!

 

[Heyjoe4]

It’s a fun thought experiment to think “what would our outlook be if we gave Willis somewhere between high end backup money to a Justin Fields deal (maybe 2 years/$30M), gave him the key to the car the next 2 years, and traded Love for whatever the market is (my guess is somewhere in the ballpark of three 1sts).

Would this work, would we find success? I have no doubt that JL is the better QB, but Willis really does seem to be the better fit for the type of offense that MLF wants to run.

You’re right though, the dead cap issue ends all hypotheticals right there. If we were two years further down the road, it would be a more realistic discussion.

Wow Adam that's a very interesting "what if". Teams with truly elite and healthy defenses usually win SBs. The baseball analogy is that great pitching beats great hitting.

I think love is an excellent QB, and my opinion on him has changed since he was drafted. Can he take a team to a SB, as a leader? Not so sure about that.

I do think a guy like Parsons can carry an entire team. His work ethic is off the chart, he's still young for the position he plays, and his presence lifts the play of the 10 other guys on D. Eliminate injuries, and get solid play from the offense, and a SB is in reach.

But there is no need to consider replacing Love. First of all, that's damn hard to do. And Gluten has surrounded him with talented teammates, CB group notwithstanding.

 

[adambr2]

I don't live on these boards true, but, what does any of that matter? I have been here 14 years if that counts for anything.

Anyway, I am serious as my posts from prior years will attest. Never been a Love fan from the beginning, hated the draft pick at the time. At times I've doubted my assessment of Love, he has had some good games. But, overall I don't think he's ever going to lead this team anywhere, no elite traits. To this day, six years in, he has yet to lead the team to a division title as a starter, yet around here people keep talking about Super Bowls. And spare me the hogwash about his first three years on the bench...he wasn't good enough to start anyway...meanwhile guys like Williams, Maye, Hurts, Purdy, Nix, etc. are getting the job done in their first three seasons.

Love's career will mimic Cousins, IMO. Some good regular season stats on and off, but, that's the ceiling.

At least Willis has some elite traits, beautiful mechanics, escapability, etc., as noted in my original post.

You can research the cap yourself if it matters to you, but, cutting Gary, Jenkins and other dead weight should make moving on from Love possible.

You can say he wasn’t good enough to start in his first 3 seasons, and that’s probably true, he definitely wasn’t a rookie ready prospect.

But the statement you bolded of “to this day, six years in, he has yet to lead the team to a division title as starter”, is inherently misleading.

You can’t lead the team to a division title as a starter when you’re not the starter. That would be like putting it on Malik Willis if we don’t win the division this year.

A division title is also only partially about your team and also about the strength of the division. Bryce Young is probably going to win a division title this year, but that doesn’t make him better than Love.

 

[Heyjoe4]

You can say he wasn’t good enough to start in his first 3 seasons, and that’s probably true, he definitely wasn’t a rookie ready prospect.

But the statement you bolded of “to this day, six years in, he has yet to lead the team to a division title as starter”, is inherently misleading.

You can’t lead the team to a division title as a starter when you’re not the starter. That would be like putting it on Malik Willis if we don’t win the division this year.

Thanks Adam. I don't think this is what SY is saying. He's saying, I think, that in three years as a starter the Packers have not won the North.

That's true, but I don't think it's the only stick by which to measure Love. He's a fine starting QB, probably not a top 5 guy. With the right talent around him, he's capable of winning a SB.

 

[adambr2]

Thanks Adam. I don't think this is what SY is saying. He's saying, I think, that in three years as a starter the Packers have not won the North.

That's true, but I don't think it's the only stick by which to measure Love. He's a fine starting QB, probably not a top 5 guy. With the right talent around him, he's capable of winning a SB.

Wasn’t what he was saying? I quoted the literal words and they were bolded for effect.

 

[OldSchool101]

You can't knock it out of bounds intentionally. It's a 10 yd penalty, and a re-kick.

Interesting point. Might need more clarification as I’m seeing both versions of this rule. The generic AI type answer is broad saying forward/backward slapping isn’t allowed. However imo that’s a broad answer and not content with this specific scenario. Why would a Receiving team slap a ball toward an opponent goal line?

The existing rule for Batting is only applied (loosely applied because it has to be definitively used to advance the ball towards the opponent Goal) if it is deemed the Return team or Offense Purposely Bats the ball Forward and in field of play. Such as in attempt to gain field advantage. The only exception I’m reading is if it’s in the Paint, THAT is correctly a flag if it’s slapped in either direction. I notched AI doesn’t distinguish between the scenarios because it’s broad answer. But not specific to Kickoffs.

I’m near 100% sure you can slap a ball out of bounds on the sideline. I’ve watched players do this and never get flagged. How would you even determine it’s a Slap? Suddenly anyone not securing a ball is a slap? There would be slapping flags every game.

Notice Bullet point #3

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[OldSchool101]

The advantages? The sideline covers a massive surface encircling the entire field of play. Any ball touching it is instantly a clock stop, not an infraction. Any player touching any part of the sideline and ball touching them is instantly play over. The sideline doesn’t need to “secure” a football. The split split millisecond a ball touches the sideline, it’s play over. Similar to the goal line being an invisible plane that extends upwards. THAT is why players occasionally scoop a loose ball out to the sideline when it’s risky to recover it, not to advance it, but protect it.

The sideline? It interfaces the field of play on BOTH sides and across a 480 Foot expanse (240X2) It can be used anywhere between pylons. That’s a huge advantage for a team and it’s why teams use it to stop the clock regularly. Understanding sideline limitations or inclusions is a critical part of the game. Particularly on Kickoffs. Many NFL players don’t even know how it can be used.

I once saw a Kickoff land in bounds at the 2 yardline. Very recently. The Returner stood in the field and the ball touched him. (He caught it and stepped backwards and onto the Sideline by an inch) Possession at the 1.5 yard line!! Oh he was extremely fortunate, had he fumbled it into play? Total nightmare. This was a veteran, NFL KR.


Had that Returner stepped on the sideline FIRST and simply touched the ball? Even if it fumbled into play? It’s an instant clock stop and possession change. He grounds the ball instantly like an electrical current.
Next? The ball would advance to the 40! I’m 100% sure that a significant number of professional athletes are not even aware of that. It’s very apparent his coaches don’t know or they just don’t care.

Technically on a Kickoff near sideline you could line up several of your tallest players to quickly lay on the sideline with toes and reach arms into field of play. All just past 10 yards. If at ANY time that ball touches those players? Laying into the field? They instantly ground the ball to sideline. You can extend parts of sideline nearly 3 full yards into the field. It sounds crazy, but I’ve seen it used several times.

 

[Magooch]

LaFleur when asked about our special teams units:

“I mean, I get it. You're looking at three plays that are killer plays. But I think if you look at the totality, I think our [special] teams have done a pretty good job, especially when you look at our coverage units... I know we're sound in what we do and I think guys have been competing. It's not like we're giving up huge returns and things of that nature. It's just unfortunate that there's been a couple moments where it puts a black cloud over whatever's been done.”

As I've said plenty of times now, I think there's a lot of things that Matt does well. But I've also pointed out plenty of times how he is loyal to "his guys" to a fault, to the point that it's a massive detriment to not just himself as a coach but to his team as a whole. Regardless of the positives he brings to the table, if he can't be the guy who steps up and makes the hard decisions that need to be made, he doesn't have any business continuing on as head coach. I get not wanting to throw your guys under the bus, but this is just objectively untrue, too. We've floated between like 22nd and 28th by ST DVOA all season long. Never once this season have we even been a "technically above-average" ST unit at any point.

 

[adambr2]

LaFleur when asked about our special teams units:


As I've said plenty of times now, I think there's a lot of things that Matt does well. But I've also pointed out plenty of times how he is loyal to "his guys" to a fault, to the point that it's a massive detriment to not just himself as a coach but to his team as a whole. Regardless of the positives he brings to the table, if he can't be the guy who steps up and makes the hard decisions that need to be made, he doesn't have any business continuing on as head coach. I get not wanting to throw your guys under the bus, but this is just objectively untrue, too. We've floated between like 22nd and 28th by ST DVOA all season long. Never once this season have we even been a "technically above-average" ST unit at any point.

Good grief, Matt. “Well we haven’t been giving up 70 yard kickoff returns or anything!”

What a great bar to have.

We’re currently 30th according to Statmuse. We have looked at the “totality”, Matt. It’s bad.

 

[gopkrs]

LaFleur when asked about our special teams units:


As I've said plenty of times now, I think there's a lot of things that Matt does well. But I've also pointed out plenty of times how he is loyal to "his guys" to a fault, to the point that it's a massive detriment to not just himself as a coach but to his team as a whole. Regardless of the positives he brings to the table, if he can't be the guy who steps up and makes the hard decisions that need to be made, he doesn't have any business continuing on as head coach. I get not wanting to throw your guys under the bus, but this is just objectively untrue, too. We've floated between like 22nd and 28th by ST DVOA all season long. Never once this season have we even been a "technically above-average" ST unit at any point.

To me, that makes a lot more sense than saying "he just can't win the big one." You gotta have good coaches and if the head coach can't pick those guys or keeps mediocre ones around; then he isn't a great head coach.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Wasn’t what he was saying? I quoted the literal words and they were bolded for effect.

My bad. You are correct. Love can't be held accountable for a failure to win a SB in years he was a backup. I know it was in SY's coment and you bolded it.

Sorry Adam.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Good grief, Matt. “Well we haven’t been giving up 70 yard kickoff returns or anything!”

What a great bar to have.

We’re currently 30th according to Statmuse. We have looked at the “totality”, Matt. It’s bad.

There has been nothing "special" about GB's STs unit for quite a while. This is most obvious in KR and PR.

In fairness, Whelan is an excellent punter, and the same can be said for McManus as kicker. But it hasn't been a unit noted for returns. One big play by STs on returns can be as big as a TO. GB just doesn't excel at the position - and they're not horrible either.

I think rookie Williams is the KR and Doubs is the PR. I thought rookie Golden was in there at some point.

 

[adambr2]

My bad. You are correct. Love can't be held accountable for a failure to win a SB in years he was a backup. I know it was in SY's coment and you bolded it.

Sorry Adam.

Not a biggie at all , was just clarifying why I responded with that, lol

 

[rmontro]

My bad. You are correct. Love can't be held accountable for a failure to win a SB in years he was a backup.

Maybe he wasn't holding the clipboard correctly.

 

[Magooch]

To me, that makes a lot more sense than saying "he just can't win the big one." You gotta have good coaches and if the head coach can't pick those guys or keeps mediocre ones around; then he isn't a great head coach.

It's made all the more shocking IMO by the fact that we have a GM in Gute who is generally pretty good about moving on from players even though it might seem "too early". We've had plenty of cases where we cut/trade/let walk a player who many of us thought would be sticking around...only for them to quickly fall off after leaving GB. Generally speaking I think when we have an opportunity to move on from a player at a reasonable cost, Gute does a good job of balancing that rather than keeping someone around until they're a total liability and THEN moving on.

But Matt is the total opposite, and it's not like this is anything new. He will give you a million chances and it's not till mistake #1,000,001 is screaming in his face that he will finally act. Under Maurice Drayton, we had quite literally the WORST (32/32) special teams unit in the league yet he was brought back for another season and it wasn't until special teams clearly and directly got us bounced by SF in the playoffs that Matt finally summoned up the stones to act. Everyone and their mom knew this was the obvious conclusion for MONTHS but he simply would not do it. In the case of Bisaccia, special teams has consistently been terrible but Matt's shown no indication that he'd consider a change there; rather he has actually *promoted* Rich in that time.

"You're only as good as the people you have around you." - John C. Maxwell

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I'd trade Love to LV, AZ, PIT or NYJ and give Willis a new 90-to-100 mil./3yr. deal as the new starter this offseason. If Gute and MLF don't like it they can get lost, too. Do it Policy!

As a few have pointed out, if Love was traded/cut, the Packers would be dealing with a $98M+ dead cap hit.

So while you can talk about the merits of "Willis over Love" as the Packer QB in 2026 and beyond, the discussion is dead in the water due to Love's dead cap hit.

The good news for the Packers, with what Willis did on Saturday night, his compensatory pick calculation could possibly net the Packers a 2027 3rd round comp. pick.

 

[Packers4ever]

Both Kyle Shanahan and Dan Campbell took over absolute dumpster fires.

MLF has been around 2 years longer than Campbell.

Shanahan has been to 2 Super Bowls.

If MLF had been to even one Super Bowl, he’d be getting more slack.

Correct Shanahan and Campbell took over dumpster fire, I dont recall MLF getting into the same situation , even J Harbaugh is better than MLF
MM had one super bowl , MLF has 0 after 7 seasons
If MLF had one Super Bowl , no body would be giving him more slack cuase he made it to the big game

 

[Packers4ever]

That's an interesting comment I hadn't considered. But I disagree with the idea that another HC, in this case Shanahan or Campbell, would have won in GB with the same talent available to MLF. That's just way too subjective. Ask ten people and 5 will agree, 5 will disagree.

I think any talk of dumping MLF is incredulous. A lot of very good HCs never win a SB. It's just not that easy, and even great teams get injuries. Sound familiar?

I was watching the Steelers/Lions yesterday. It looked like a blowout win for the Steelers until the Lions offense came alive in the 2nd half. Secondary players Branch and Joseph are out for the season. Dan Campbell can't do anything about that.

Anyway Packers4ever thanks for the idea that the Packers would be winners with a different HC on the level of Campbell/Shanahan. I don't agree, but it's certainly a debatable point.

Though is hard to win or make it to SB , MLF had big chances to do so , while other good HC have not cause they did not have the talent MLF had , you are as good as your players but if you are a good HC with good players you should get there like other great coaches
Looks like you are in MLF bandwagon to praise him , without realizing he will never make it to the SB because if he was he had plenty of time to do so in the last 7 seasons
what i have noticed in big games he does not have the killer instinct , when he has the chance to do it he comes up with some ridiculous play calling , he does not get his team ready to play big games , easy games he blows it and tough games he is not prepared , MLF may be a real nice guy but he just does not have what it takes to win it all

 

[Magooch]

I know I've brought up the stat before (as have others) that most coaches who DO win a Super Bowl will do so (on average) within their first 6-7 seasons with their team, but honestly that's not something I hold a ton against Matt.

At the end of the day, going on a Super Bowl run takes a lot going your way. So the mere fact that Matt hasn't *won* a Super Bowl in 6+ years...I can't put a ton of stock in that. If that were our primary measuring stick for success, then we (and most other teams) would be looking for new coaches all the time.

BUT, I do find it slightly more concerning that he hasn't *made* a Super Bowl yet, much less won one.

OR, even more concerning - to put it another way - if we don't manage a playoff win this year, Matt will have ONE playoff win in his last five seasons (Of course, by extension, as it stands - he has one playoff win in the last four seasons). Consistently making the playoffs is nice and all, but one win in five years (potentially) is unacceptable, IMO.

Beyond that, I find it troublesome that I just don't see a ton of development/progression/growth overall. We had a great run under LaFleur with Rodgers (and to some extent I would say that LaFleur helped Rodgers as much as Rodgers helped LaFleur. They were mutually beneficial for each other).

Since then...
8-9, 3rd in NFCN, missed playoffs
9-8, 2nd in NFCN, made playoffs. win in WC, lose in divisional
11-6, 3rd in NFCN, made playoffs, lost in WC.
This season, at best we will be able to improve by 1/2 game compared to last season. (11-5-1)

This is a coach who constantly preaches about discipline, accountability, sharp execution, etc...yet I just don't see a ton of that. As I've said before, the same issues have came up year after year after year in LaFleur's tenure. Either he is not serious about fixing them, or he is incapable of doing so. Neither one is an appealing option. And I know many will be quick to say, "Well, we have a really young team!" Yes, we do. That's not an accident, though. We have a young team *by design*. We know (or *should* know) the "side effects" that come with that. We're not caught off-guard by having a young team, it's something we have specifically put together year after year. That excuse doesn't hold up for me any more - if that's the best we can come up with year-after-year, maybe it's time to change philosophy, if nothing else.

 

[OldSchool101]

LaFleur when asked about our special teams units:


As I've said plenty of times now, I think there's a lot of things that Matt does well. But I've also pointed out plenty of times how he is loyal to "his guys" to a fault, to the point that it's a massive detriment to not just himself as a coach but to his team as a whole. Regardless of the positives he brings to the table, if he can't be the guy who steps up and makes the hard decisions that need to be made, he doesn't have any business continuing on as head coach. I get not wanting to throw your guys under the bus, but this is just objectively untrue, too. We've floated between like 22nd and 28th by ST DVOA all season long. Never once this season have we even been a "technically above-average" ST unit at any point.

The Packers are now
#1 Punt Average
#1 Punt Net
#31 PR Yards/attempt
#20 KR yards/attempt (tied)
#15 opponent KR yards
#4 opponent XPM
#4 opponent XPA
#12 opponent FGM
#16 opponent FGA
#9 XPA
#12 XPM
#7 FGA
#23 FGM

My take here is our league leading Punt average and punt return yards easily balance out each other into just about an average Punt units.

Our #20 KR per is about 0.6 yards off of top16 (top 50%)

Our FG% is one criteria that lowers our rating below average, but not despicable or anything that would call for a Coach getting fired either. Keep in mind we lost our Kicker to injury for several weeks and we also have 2 attempts beyond 60+ and actually hit one. I recall our FG% ranked near last approaching mid season. To pull #32 down to #23 ranked? in less than a half season infers we are improving markedly in that sector. Likely finish top #20 area and if we add in #4 XPM? I’d call us about smack dab middle of league in FG.

On Teams Defense. We rank #15 in KR coverage and #22 in PR coverage per attempt. So around #18-19 combined Teams average Coverage ranking. Just letting all the various categories kinda saturate and Marinate? our Teams are probably VERY close to the median area. l’d guess #15-19 area ranked in totality or something thereabouts.

 

[milani]

That's an interesting comment I hadn't considered. But I disagree with the idea that another HC, in this case Shanahan or Campbell, would have won in GB with the same talent available to MLF. That's just way too subjective. Ask ten people and 5 will agree, 5 will disagree.

I think any talk of dumping MLF is incredulous. A lot of very good HCs never win a SB. It's just not that easy, and even great teams get injuries. Sound familiar?

I was watching the Steelers/Lions yesterday. It looked like a blowout win for the Steelers until the Lions offense came alive in the 2nd half. Secondary players Branch and Joseph are out for the season. Dan Campbell can't do anything about that.

Anyway Packers4ever thanks for the idea that the Packers would be winners with a different HC on the level of Campbell/Shanahan. I don't agree, but it's certainly a debatable point.

I know we have been beaten to a pulp this season but when I saw the number of game starts missed by players indicates the Cardinals and Lions lead the league, it blew me away.

 

[adambr2]

I know I've brought up the stat before (as have others) that most coaches who DO win a Super Bowl will do so (on average) within their first 6-7 seasons with their team, but honestly that's not something I hold a ton against Matt.

At the end of the day, going on a Super Bowl run takes a lot going your way. So the mere fact that Matt hasn't *won* a Super Bowl in 6+ years...I can't put a ton of stock in that. If that were our primary measuring stick for success, then we (and most other teams) would be looking for new coaches all the time.

BUT, I do find it slightly more concerning that he hasn't *made* a Super Bowl yet, much less won one.

OR, even more concerning - to put it another way - if we don't manage a playoff win this year, Matt will have ONE playoff win in his last five seasons (Of course, by extension, as it stands - he has one playoff win in the last four seasons). Consistently making the playoffs is nice and all, but one win in five years (potentially) is unacceptable, IMO.

Beyond that, I find it troublesome that I just don't see a ton of development/progression/growth overall. We had a great run under LaFleur with Rodgers (and to some extent I would say that LaFleur helped Rodgers as much as Rodgers helped LaFleur. They were mutually beneficial for each other).

Since then...
8-9, 3rd in NFCN, missed playoffs
9-8, 2nd in NFCN, made playoffs. win in WC, lose in divisional
11-6, 3rd in NFCN, made playoffs, lost in WC.
This season, at best we will be able to improve by 1/2 game compared to last season. (11-5-1)

This is a coach who constantly preaches about discipline, accountability, sharp execution, etc...yet I just don't see a ton of that. As I've said before, the same issues have came up year after year after year in LaFleur's tenure. Either he is not serious about fixing them, or he is incapable of doing so. Neither one is an appealing option. And I know many will be quick to say, "Well, we have a really young team!" Yes, we do. That's not an accident, though. We have a young team *by design*. We know (or *should* know) the "side effects" that come with that. We're not caught off-guard by having a young team, it's something we have specifically put together year after year. That excuse doesn't hold up for me any more - if that's the best we can come up with year-after-year, maybe it's time to change philosophy, if nothing else.

Agree with most of this.

I don’t hold it against MLF that he hasn’t won a Super Bowl.

Not being to one after 7 seasons isn’t a dealbreaker, but it definitely counts against him.

The lack of clear progression is the most concerning thing to me. We hear every season — “youngest team in the league!”

Okay. So they should be young and *improving*, right? Being young means nothing without the implication that the arrow is pointing up. Otherwise, it’s just ages.

2023 - 7 seed and a big wild card win followed by close divisional loss

2024 - 7 seed and one and done

2025 - 7 seed (likely) and ?????

That doesn’t look like progression.

 

[Magooch]

The Packers are now
#1 Punt Average
#1 Punt Net
#28 PR Yards/attempt
#20 KR yards/attempt (tied)
#15 opponent KR yards
#4 opponent XPM
#4 opponent XPA
#12 opponent FGM
#16 opponent FGA
#9 XPA
#12 XPM
#7 FGA
#23 FGM

My take here is our league leading Punt average and punt return yards easily balance out each other into just above average.

Our #20 KR per is about 0.6 yards off of top16 (top 50%)

Our FG% is one criteria that lowers our rating below average, but not despicable or anything that would call for a Coach getting fired either. Keep in mind we lost our Kicker to injury for several weeks and we also have 2 attempts beyond 60+ and actually hit one. I recall our FG% ranked near last approaching mid season. To pull #32 down to #23 ranked? in less than a half season infers we are improving markedly in that sector. Likely finish top #20 area and if we add in #4 XPM? I’d call us about smack dab middle of league in FG.

Per Pro Football reference:

#31 in yards per punt return
#21 in yards per kick return
#23 in field goal percentage
#26 in extra point percentage
#2 in total yards per punt
#7 in net yards per punt
#32 for punts downed inside the 20 (total; #28 by percentage)
#12 in yards allowed per punt return
#18 in yards allowed per kickoff return
#19 in opponent FG percentage
#26 in opponent XP percentage
#25 in yards per punt allowed against

And just for a point of comparison - last season:
#24 in yards per punt return
#14 in yards per kick return
#18 in field goal percentage
#6 in extra point percentage
#24 in total yards per punt
#27 in net yards per punt
#24 for punts downed inside the 20 (total; #22 by percentage)
#8 in yards allowed per punt return
#23 in yards allowed per kickoff return
#16 in opponent FG percentage
#14 in opponent XP percentage
#15 in yards per punt allowed against

McManus is currently #27 in field goal percentage and #17 in XP percentage. He is tied for 23rd in 50+ yard field goals and tied for 30th in 40-49 yard field goals.

Bisaccia's ST ranked 22nd and 29th in 2022 and 2023 (Gosselin) and by DVOA were 16th last season and floating between 21st-28th this season.

This is with, by all accounts, the highest-paid ST coordinator in the league.

 

[OldSchool101]

I know we have been beaten to a pulp this season but when I saw the number of game starts missed by players indicates the Cardinals and Lions lead the league, it blew me away.

As of last week. The Bears have also had the most missed games with 281 and Lions close behind 267. Although these sites also put a numerical score, possibly based on degree of impact and Bears and Lions rank more normal at #11 and #14 most affected by injury. GB isn’t too bad and actually sits at #22 **

**Keeping in mind this wouldn’t factor Micah Parsons yet as he started Week 15, so he still likely gets full game credit.