Former packer gives his take on the Defense

net

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 4, 2005
Messages
980
Reaction score
22
Location
Rhinelander
I wonder if that had something to do with Rodgers missing half the season.
It had more to do with a defense that couldn't stop a bunch of grandmothers at a grocery store. The Super Bowl is the best example of what I'm addressing. The Seahawks defense stopped cold the top offense in the NFL and ran away with the game. It was true in 1921 and it's true in 2014: defense wins championships. Rodgers loss also showed the horrible lack of a good backup at a key position. Reason: money. The Bears found a way to put a more than adequate backup on the field.
Until the Packers put 11 guys on defense capable of putting the team into the the top 10 defensively, they will be an also ran. Look at their defensive ranking the last time they won the Super Bowl.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
It had more to do with a defense that couldn't stop a bunch of grandmothers at a grocery store. The Super Bowl is the best example of what I'm addressing. The Seahawks defense stopped cold the top offense in the NFL and ran away with the game. It was true in 1921 and it's true in 2014: defense wins championships. Rodgers loss also showed the horrible lack of a good backup at a key position. Reason: money. The Bears found a way to put a more than adequate backup on the field.
Until the Packers put 11 guys on defense capable of putting the team into the the top 10 defensively, they will be an also ran. Look at their defensive ranking the last time they won the Super Bowl.

So you really think the Packers would have gone 2-5-1 even if Rodgers would have played???

Money wasn't the reason the Packers didn't have a solid backup, McCown played for the veterans minimum. TT just messed up the situation.
 

easyk83

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 20, 2013
Messages
2,783
Reaction score
280
Those day three picks. Choosing Davon House over Richard Sherman just about sums it up why Seattle was in the Super Bowl and not us.

Or maybe they're just cheating better. Like Lance Armstrong level over and above the usual PEDs, Pete Caroll has a reputation to maintain.
 

Shawnsta3

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 19, 2011
Messages
1,273
Reaction score
137
Location
Manawa & Shawano, WI
Bad example IMO: The Seahawks were also wrong about Sherman. He was selected with the 154th pick in that draft. If any team had any idea he would turn out to be the best, or one of the best CBs in the league where would he have been drafted?

Cardinals, Giants, Ravens, Patriots, Bills (2), Chargers (2), Texans (2), 49ers, Raiders (2), Saints, Eagles, Steelers (2), Panthers, Chiefs, Packers, Browns, Vikings, Cowboys, Jaguars. That’s a list of the teams who picked 24 players listed as CBs before Sherman was picked. Some teams with very well regarded front offices regarding personnel acquisition picked CBs ahead of Sherman, including the Ravens, 49ers and the Steelers who, like four other teams, picked two CBs before pick #154.
Saying no-one predicted Sherman would be this good is stating the obvious, I'm not arguing that. Nobody except Sherman himself probably would. Nobody predicted Aaron Rodgers would be that good at 23 overall. That being said there are no excuses in scouting and drafting. You've got to grab the best player available.

21 teams passed on drafting Aaron Rodgers. Including well regarded front offices like, you guessed it, the Ravens and 49ers. Now if the Packers at 23 would have said "Well, you know what if a well respected organization like the San Francisco 49ers passed on him with a need at quarterback he must not be that good, so we won't take him."

No.

The Packers scouted him as the best prospect on the board and pulled the trigger. Just as they incorrectly did with House IMO.
 

bayoupacker

Cheesehead
Joined
May 24, 2012
Messages
4
Reaction score
1
Speaking of former Packers, just ran across this clip of Greg Koch interviewing AJ Hawk on Radio Row in New York LINK
 

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
That being said there are no excuses in scouting and drafting. You've got to grab the best player available.
What a ridiculous standard that not one single person could achieve.
21 teams passed on drafting Aaron Rodgers. Including well regarded front offices like, you guessed it, the Ravens and 49ers. Now if the Packers at 23 would have said "Well, you know what if a well respected organization like the San Francisco 49ers passed on him with a need at quarterback he must not be that good, so we won't take him." No. The Packers scouted him as the best prospect on the board and pulled the trigger. Just as they incorrectly did with House IMO.
You have succeeded in completely missing the point. No team would act in accordance with the embarrassingly bad straw man you have erected here. The point is every single team in the league, all with varying degrees of talented personnel men, whose only job is evaluating talent for the NFL, missed on Sherman’s talent, even the Seahawks. And they missed it over and over again in that draft. Only a person who insists the team he roots for has 'got to grab the best player available at every pick' would criticize the Packers for missing on a player every other team in the league missed on.

Listen to or read what Thompson has said about the draft. One of the reasons he trades down so often is because he knows no pick is a certainty: The more picks, the more chances of hitting on a player. Pick whoever you think is the best evaluator of talent in the history of the league and calculate how close he came, or now comes, to your 100% standard.

BTW, Aaron Rodgers was famously picked with the 24th selection of the first round of the 2005 draft. Not a big deal except that Rodgers will probably turn out to be an extremely important player in the history of the franchise.
 

Shawnsta3

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 19, 2011
Messages
1,273
Reaction score
137
Location
Manawa & Shawano, WI
What a ridiculous standard that not one single person could achieve. You have succeeded in completely missing the point. No team would act in accordance with the embarrassingly bad straw man you have erected here. The point is every single team in the league, all with varying degrees of talented personnel men, whose only job is evaluating talent for the NFL, missed on Sherman’s talent, even the Seahawks. And they missed it over and over again in that draft. Only a person who insists the team he roots for has 'got to grab the best player available at every pick' would criticize the Packers for missing on a player every other team in the league missed on.

Listen to or read what Thompson has said about the draft. One of the reasons he trades down so often is because he knows no pick is a certainty: The more picks, the more chances of hitting on a player. Pick whoever you think is the best evaluator of talent in the history of the league and calculate how close he came, or now comes, to your 100% standard.

BTW, Aaron Rodgers was famously picked with the 24th selection of the first round of the 2005 draft. Not a big deal except that Rodgers will probably turn out to be an extremely important player in the history of the franchise.
...If you just compared the later rounds of the draft since let's say 2011 when Seattle has hit on two top 10 corners in the league in Byron Maxwell and Richard Sherman, Super Bowl MVP starting linebacker Malcolm Smith, starting RG J.R Sweezy, and other impact players like TE Luke Willson.

The Packers? Brad Jones. That's their only starter. Micah Hyde only impact player. And Ryan Taylor maybe?

Incomparable. The Packers missed on more players than the Seahawks. Forget 100%. I would take 50% from Thompson.

Mistyped on Rodgers, my bad.
 

rmchief50ret

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 14, 2014
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
For those who think GB and TT should continue with "business as usual" you may be correct to some degree. However, if GB waits too long to see the trend, the perhaps business as usual will put us back in the 70s. If we need to strengthen our defense (and offense) with a dip into the FA market, that should not be considered out of the question: Look what happened when we got Reggie White. For those who think Seattle may be a flash in the pan, you may or may not be correct, and Pete Carroll's philosophy is just one of many philosophies. But, it works. And so do others. I think we need to get back on track as the North powerhouse....we will not win it with 8 losses next year.
 

NOMOFO

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 3, 2014
Messages
1,105
Reaction score
76
It had more to do with a defense that couldn't stop a bunch of grandmothers at a grocery store. The Super Bowl is the best example of what I'm addressing. The Seahawks defense stopped cold the top offense in the NFL and ran away with the game. It was true in 1921 and it's true in 2014: defense wins championships. Rodgers loss also showed the horrible lack of a good backup at a key position. Reason: money. The Bears found a way to put a more than adequate backup on the field.
Until the Packers put 11 guys on defense capable of putting the team into the the top 10 defensively, they will be an also ran. Look at their defensive ranking the last time they won the Super Bowl.

No... sorry... it's not true. The league has succeeded at making this an offensive driven league and no, defense no longer "wins championships". That's just no longer a true statement. Like several others pointed out, only a few times over the past 10 years has a defense first team won it all. That's just a fact. Of the top 10 defenses in the NFL this season, less than half even made it to the playoffs! You are way off base on this one. Almost never does the team finishing with the best defense in the NFL win the Super Bowl. So... ya... you are off base.
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top